Wikipedia talk:Twinkle/Archive 40

Archive 35

←

Archive 38

Archive 39

Archive 40

Archive 41

Archive 42

→

Archive 45

Missing Rollback Options in Diff View

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T192755

Not sure if this is the best place to ask about this but figured I would just give it a try. I have been using Twinkle rather heavily for the last little bit, but suddenly (without intervention from me, as far as I can tell) the rollback 'buttons' in the diff view have disappeared. I have tried changing all kind of settings and turning off adblockers, etc. But to no affect. Any help would be appreciated. Zchrykng (talk) 21:16, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Mine have gone now too. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:22, 26 April 2018 (UTC) (please  mention me on reply; thanks!)

Same here. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 01:53, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@Emir of Wikipedia and Classicwiki: Well, I defaulted all my preferences and toggled Twinkle back on and it seems to work now. Not sure what happened. Zchrykng (talk) 02:00, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

What version of what web browser on what operating system are you (plural) using? --Izno (talk) 01:57, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@Izno: I am using Google Chrome Version 65.0.3325.181 (Official Build) (32-bit), but I also tried using Firefox Developer Edition. Zchrykng (talk) 02:02, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Izno, Google Chrome Version 65.0.3325.181 (Official Build) (64-bit). Will reset and reboot tomorrow if it doesn't fix itself. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 02:05, 27 April 2018 (UTC) Quick fix. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 02:10, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@Zchrykng: Also was in me. --Cyrus noto3at bulaga ^{Talk to me} 02:20, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@Cyrus noto3at bulaga, Zchrykng, and Classicwiki: Okay, so, this works for me on Windows 7 using Firefox 59.0.2 (and if I were to guess, Windows 10, same Firefox, though I need to be home to say authoritatively). Did you try another browser? --Izno (talk) 15:04, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@Izno: I will admit to having stopped trouble shooting after I got it working by switching to defaults. I did try Firefox and Chrome though before I stopped. Zchrykng (talk) 15:58, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@Izno:, I have reset all my preferences and Twinkle options to no avail. Cleared cache, tried different browsers, nothing working yet. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 16:40, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

How do I get this fixed? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:44, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@NeilN: resetting my preferences to default and setting everything up again worked, not sure if it is a good option though. Zchrykng (talk) 14:27, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@Zchrykng: Thanks, already tried that. [1] Didn't work. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:30, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@NeilN: Question, did you reset just Twinkle’s settings or all of Wikipedia’s settings? Because the latter is what I did to get it working again. Zchrykng (talk) 15:58, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@NeilN: Per above question, what browser/browser version/OS? --Izno (talk) 15:04, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@Izno: Firefox 56.0.2 and Windows 10. Monobook skin. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:08, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

NeilN Turning off visual differences in beta features appears to fix the problem. Galobtter (pingó mió) 11:17, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure I've read about this somewhere else in last few days, and it's a "feature" not a "bug" - something to do with requests from German wikipedia. If I remember where I saw it I'll link. PamD 13:48, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Yes: see Tech News, and WMDE Technical Wishes/Rollback and WMDE Technical Wishes/Rollback/Feedback round. PamD 13:54, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@PamD: It's a wishlist item being rightly shot down. No changes should have occurred yet. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:59, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@NeilN: but seems a bit of a coincidence that it's malfunctioning while under discussion! Best enquire at WP:VPT I guess. PamD

@PamD: The rollback option being discussed with WMDE and TW's rollback options are unrelated functions. --Izno (talk) 15:01, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Did anyone fine a fix for this? I have tried different browsers and the problem persists. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:10, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

What skin are you using? Galobtter (pingó mió) 19:29, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Vector, with no custom CSS or Javascript. I have a lot of scripts though at User:Emir of Wikipedia/common.js, but unless any person having this problem shares a script I don't think that would be the problem. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:44, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Posted about this on VPT, see Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Missing twinkle rollback links for some people Galobtter (pingó mió) 20:44, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

In User Preferences Beta tab I turned off "Automatically enable all new beta features" and "Visual differences" and the issue is resolved for now. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 23:57, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks @Classicwiki: that resolved the problem for me. Also note template:pme which you can use instead of manually typing out a request to be pinged. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 10:51, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

@Emir of Wikipedia:, I don't write it out. It is just part of my signature :) . Although most editors just ignore it :( . Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 16:17, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

I just had the visual preferences turned on and when I turned it off the links came back. I turned it back on and the links went away. ~ GB fan 10:53, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Yeah we have to keep it off. It has been reported at T192755 though. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 11:15, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone who chased this down and figured it out! --NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:08, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry about this, I didn't anticipate that adding the "header" to visual diffs (which we did last week) would cause issues with other scripts. I've just proposed a patch to do this differently (in a way that should interact better with other tools like Twinkle), but it might take a day or two before we get it reviewed and deployed. In the meantime, if you want to keep using visual diffs and Twinkle, note that the "[restore this version]" link is actually present, but only when you switch to the "Visual" tab (using the buttons in top-right corner of the diff). Sorry! Matma Rex talk 21:34, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

This is fixed now. Matma Rex talk 00:17, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Twinkle on tl.wiki

Please add Twinkle in tl.wiki? --Cyrus noto3at bulaga ^{Talk to me} 02:45, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Need help with TW menu and forms on tewp

We have been using Twinkle on Telugu WP from 2013. We noticed unwanted marks around TW menu few years back and problems displaying heading of forms in Firefox recently.(Screenshots on tewp) Even our searchbox text slightly descends below the box. Need help/suggestion from Twinkle expert to fix the same.--Arjunaraoc (talk) 22:28, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

• Arjunaraoc, it has on si.wiki and several wikis. --Cyrus noto3at bulaga ^{Talk to me} 09:02, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Student welcome

This could use an overhaul working with editors such as User:Shalor (Wiki Ed) who are experts working on our student projects. One thing that I think would help is a link to Help:Referencing for beginners in the welcome message. Indeed that probably should be added to most of the welcome messages as it's a tricky bit of editing and new editors often struggle with it. Doug Weller talk 09:10, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Opening and using

Hello. I am new to this program. How do I open and utilize Twinkle to detect vandalism in a page? Thanks in advance. Lightningboltz03 (talk) 15:16, 7 May 2018 (UTC)Lightningboltz03 5/7/18

Thank you Lightningboltz03 for your interest in helping to tackle vandalism here. Twinkle doesn't actually detect vandalism: Twinkle makes it easier to revert vandalism and, if wished, send a message to the vandal. When you have a little more experience you can apply for access to some of our vandalism detection tools, but for now I suggest you have a read of WP:Vandalism, which tells you most of what you need to know on the subject: Noyster (talk), 17:21, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Template:Cfr-speedy and Template:Cfm-speedy

Template:Cfr-speedy has been split to Template:Cfm-speedy for mergers, following a request at WT:CFD. Please update Twinkle accordingly. – Fayenatic London 21:13, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Sockpuppet block function

It would be useful if Twinkle's block function for sock puppets had an optional parameter to indicate the sockmaster, so that an annotation can be added to the block log. The current functionality uses "[[WP:SOCK|Sock puppetry]]" as a default block rationale, but it would be nice if this could optionally be [[Wikipedia:Sock puppetry|Sock puppetry]], please see [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/<sockmaster>]]". This is the same format as the "spi block" link used in the {{checkuser}} template (which I also just learned is only visible when the template is used on an SPI page - neat). Thanks. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 12:46, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Manual/Automated Edits

Hi, fairly new as a twinkle user, had a read through the documentation.

I was wondering whether Twinkle edits count as manual or (semi) automated edits? And in either case, are all Twinkle actions manual/automated or is it a spread (e.g. tag adding vs rollback)

Cheers, Nosebagbear (talk) 15:48, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Semi-automated, since you're making the choice of which action to take, and it's doing the action to save you the editing. Primefac (talk) 16:05, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Redirected tags

If tagging an article for linkrot (bare urls), Twinkle add Template:linkrot which redirects to Template:Cleanup bare URLs. Not a problem in itself, but AWB replaces linkrot to avoid the redirect. I don't think our tools should be in conflict with each other and be making extra busy-work. I'm not sure if this happens with any other tags as well. MB 23:02, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Why does AWB replace the redirect? Seems pointless and cosmetic? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:55, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Probably just because someone thought it was "cleaner" to point to the actual template instead of a redirect (which probably exists because the template was renamed at some point). Would it be easier to change Twinkle than to get AWB to leave this alone? I think there are other templates where this happens also. MB 03:01, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

This has been a point of contention between the template folks and the AWB folks for years now - a hardcore group of AWB users (read: the developers) think that replacing template redirects with their end target must be done unless you disable genfixes, while the TW people (and people who type {{cn}} instead of {{citation needed}}) feel that they're full of it. For the record, I don't care either way, I'm just mentioning what I've seen. Primefac (talk) 17:48, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedians gonna Wikipedian ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ~ Amory (u • t • c) 19:31, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Rollback error

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T195520

Getting this message a lot: "Grabbing data of earlier revisions: [WwcShQpAIDQAAAg0YqwAAAGJ] Exception caught: A database query error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software." Any clues? Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 19:36, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Resolved apparently: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T195520 Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 20:01, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Spoke too soon, still having issues. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 20:04, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

"Delete and block" not working

The useful "Delete, block and notify" option hasn't worked for me for the past couple of days. It persistently returns a message of "Something went wrong" or similar. I use Mac OSX and Firefox. Bishonen | talk 13:36, 24 May 2018 (UTC).

Still not working. Much missed for promotional userpages under a promotional username! @MusikAnimal:? Bishonen | talk 16:53, 25 May 2018 (UTC).

@Bishonen: Hey! Are you sure you're talking about Twinkle? I don't think it has a delete and block option. Maybe you meant the spamublock or SpamUserPage scripts? I tested the former out on my computer and it worked. — MusikAnimal ^talk 18:57, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Spamublock is highly recommended, and indeed it works well. Widr (talk) 19:39, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Not Twinkle? Well, you're the authority on that, @MusikAnimal:! I thought it was Twinkle. I don't have your spamublock.js script... hang on ... aha, I do have User:Mr. Stradivarius/gadgets/SpamUserPage.js. (In my monobook.js, because I'm a disorganized idiot, I stick scripts all over the place). Indeed, Widr, it's been working like a dream till it broke three or four days ago. Have you used it recently? I'm now getting a depressed feeling people are about to tell me I need to use a different browser, update my OS, buy new hardware, move house. 😬 Bishonen | talk 19:58, 25 May 2018 (UTC).

@Bishonen: I have that too, but haven't used it for ages. MA's tool I use on a daily basis. It's much quicker and easier to use. Widr (talk) 20:14, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

OK, I've added MusikAnimal's tool, now all I need is a user to block, it's kind of difficult to test it without that. Bishonen | talk 20:25, 25 May 2018 (UTC).

Hehe, hopefully you won't need to move house, Bishonen! Thanks for the kind words. SpamUserPage is great too if you need granularity. Courtesy ping to Mr. Stradivarius just so he knows there are possible issues — MusikAnimal ^talk 03:58, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

@MusikAnimal and Bishonen: Thanks for the ping. One of the methods in a library I was using was renamed, which was causing the whole script to break. Should be fixed now, but let me know if you spot any other issues. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 08:47, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

OK, now I have both tools. Funny the way I immediately struck a drought of promotional usernames with promotional userpages the minute I added MA's tool and wanted to try it! But I finally got one now, and, naturally, it works beautifully. Bishonen | talk 14:21, 26 May 2018 (UTC).

RfPP

When using the Twinkle gadget to nominate a page for protection, I noticed that the RfPP page is not watched the way MfD pages are. Bug or feature? Jjjjjjdddddd (talk) 06:20, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Feature. It’s just like AIV: not a created page or a discussion. TonyBallioni (talk) 13:13, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Could I enable watching AIV and RfPP? Jjjjjjdddddd (talk) 23:17, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes. Just hit the star at the top of your browser. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:59, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Aww, I have to hit a whole extra button? Jjjjjjdddddd (talk) 00:35, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Minor placement request

A minor request: could uw-unsourced user warning template be moved to the common templates section of that box? I personally find that one to be by far the most common one I use. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 18:41, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

D-batch

Is there an explanation somewhere about what kinds of pages and lists D-batch will work on? I can't seem to make out why on some pages it is available in the menu and on others not. · · · Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 10:02, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Do you have a specific example page in mind? The d-batch menu doesn't appear in mainspace for obvious reasons, and it shouldn't appear on any special pages except Special:Prefixindex, so not on contributions and the like. From your talkpage Prefixindex seems to be what you were asking about, does it really not show up there for you? I see it here for example. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:46, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

I now cannot reproduce the problem, and I don't remember all the cases I tried. The drop-down menu for Twinkle did not contain the option d-batch on some pages, and on some pages d-batch would not select a list when invoked. One page on which I could not get it to select from the list was [2], which is now empty as I deleted individually. That is the only case I can be sure of, as that was the job to be done. At the time I was not recording the details of where I was testing and what came up in the menu, but I do remember several pages clearly had blue links and the Twinkle menu contained several items but not d-batch. Maybe I was doing something odd, but if so, can't seem to do it any more. It seems to show up fine and select links on Special:Prefixindex today, on the same computer with the same browser. My first thoughts were that it is available for some pages/namespaces and not for others, which would make some sense, but there was no obvious pattern when I did a few experiments, so I looked in the documentation, and found nothing to explain what was actually happening. This page was my next stop. If it happens again I will record in case there is a bug. For now, it seems to be available. Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 05:25, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for an excellent gadget!

As a new(ish) user, I would rate Twinkle as easily the best gadget in terms of usefulness and efficiency. The time difference between manually and automatically AfDing articles is remarkable. I was going to thank whoever created the gadget, but apparently many people helped, so... I guess that's just another example of the magic of collaboration? TeraTIX 13:09, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Cheeky Twinkle!

When I tried to delete an inappropriate userpage and ticked G2 — test page — Twinkle had the everloving cheek to tell me "Unable to generate summary from deletion template. Asking for reason: you didn't give one. I don't know... what with admins and their apathetic antics... I give up..." I give up too, with these uppity gadgets... grumble... Bishonen | talk 19:59, 13 June 2018 (UTC).

PS, when I tried with G3 instead, it worked. Is G2 sick? Bishonen | talk 20:03, 13 June 2018 (UTC).

G2 does not apply to pages in the user namespace; Pppery made g2 not work in user space with this, thus twinkle could not get the summary. Galobtter (pingó mió) 20:10, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

And I've seen a surprisingly large number of users try to G2 user pages anyway. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 20:11, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

FWIW cheek appears to have been lovingly added in 2011 by TTO. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 21:46, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

The nerve of that gadget! Bishonen | talk 10:35, 14 June 2018 (UTC).

3rr broken?

I've tried several times to report something at 3RR using the function on Twinkle only to get it hanging at the end (essentially after I submit, it just turns into a blank box.) I tried on a different browser, different device and running into the same issue. Am I the only one? :( CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 16:00, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

So I was able to successfully report my doppleganger account (no diffs selected) but specifically am unable to report one user with diffs selected. I'm wondering if I try with actual diffs on my alt, if it will still hang... CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 16:30, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

@Chrissymad: I just tested the 3RR reporting function with diffs and it worked fine for me. Home Lander (talk) 19:59, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Request to add {{welcome-athletics}}

Hi, can the recently-created {{welcome-athletics}} template, specific to WikiProject Athletics, please be added to Twinkle under "WikiProject welcomes"? If any changes need to be made, please let me know and I'd be happy to do that. Thanks, Habst (talk) 04:38, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Submitted as a pull request here: [3] --Habst (talk) 05:20, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Module for deletion

Can we use twinkle to nominate a module for deletion, thanks!

When I try to nominate a module for deletion, there seems a bug. Hhkohh (talk) 08:24, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

I second this. When I used Twinkle to TfD Module:Miscellaneous pages with authority control identifiers, it instead TfD'd Template:Miscellaneous pages with authority control identifiers. See Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 June 19#Template:Miscellaneous pages with authority control identifiers.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  16:01, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Bot wars

See this edit. It caused Twinkle to fail on automatic posting of the next AfD nomination because it put the new item on the same line as <!-- Add new entries to the TOP of the following list -->. Solution: the Mathbot initialisation of a new AfD day should end with a newline code. (Also Twinkle could be changed to look for the "add new entries" without including the new line code.) — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:02, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

AFD sensing error - IAFD

Trying to tag Darla Crane as A2 for es:Darla Crane Twinkle reported that there was already an AfD tag on the page, which there wasn't. I suspect it was picking up on the two Spanish templates -

* {{IAFD nombre|id=dcrane|genero=f|nombre=Darla Crane}}
* {{afdb nombre|id=4964|género=femenino|nombre=Darla Crane}}

If it's a simple fix, great. If it's not, then it's rare enough to not be worth the trouble. Thanks, Cabayi (talk) 08:29, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Twinkle bug at AIV

Sooo, interesting bug today brought to my attention by Eagleash where a report I filed via twinkle removed their report. It looks like we edited near the same time but I've not yet seen this happen. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 15:37, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

@Chrissymad: Not a bug, a default behavior to deal with obvious redundant report. It happened to me and User:GreenMeansGo at UAA. Note the timestamps of either set of edits. –Ammarpad (talk) 22:49, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

@Ammarpad: Can you clarify your response? How is my report 'redundant'? As it happens, another editor filed a subsequent report of the same editor a little later, (as a result of which the disruptive editor was blocked) but in the meantime the disruptive edits had continued. Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 02:58, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

@Eagleash: Okay, I misread the situation. I thought both, you and Chrissymad were reporting the same user. So this may or may not be from Twinkle, as it's possible to happen because of edit conflict too. –Ammarpad (talk) 05:34, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

SPI

Has the SPI report generated by Twinkle changed? I've noticed twice now that there is an extra section header at the top of the page, "Report of Sockpuppetry/Meatpuppetry", and I don't believe it's being manually added by the editor creating the report.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:04, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

I'm assuming that you're referring to this. That edit was not done by Twinkle. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:24, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Yep, it was manual edit. The same user also added this extra header on another report. I think that maybe the second case you're referring. –Ammarpad (talk) 06:42, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you for taking the time to look into it. I apologize for the false alarm.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:33, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

No level 1 warning for edit filter

I've come across several instances where a level 1 warning for triggering the edit filter would be useful, yet one does not exist. Is there a chance this could be used to fill Template:Uw-attempt1 and ported into Twinkle? Would be nice. Home Lander (talk) 15:56, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

@Home Lander: The severity of deliberately triggering edit filters makes this level one less necessary, otherwise it would've been created since. Also remember for many filters, before a user even save an edit that will trigger the filter, they do receive clear warning facing them like this. If they insists, then the edit is saved (except in few cases where disallowing is enabled). So giving then another level one warning after they were warned seems redundant here.

If you still feel it is useful, I would advise you to make direct pull request on GitHub, there are many pending requests though. –Ammarpad (talk) 15:02, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Possible bug

Today I noticed that when using Twinkle to nominate a redirect for deletion, the {{mfd}} tag was placed on the target page instead of the intended redirect page. In this case, using Twinkle created work instead of saving one from it. Thank you.--John Cline (talk) 12:55, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Redirects are sent to the current day subpage of Redirect for discussion when they're appropriately tagged. Redirects are not discussed at Miscellany for deletion, and that's what you just did.

When you opened the Twinkle dialog, you should have selected (RFD) Redirect for discussion which is the last option in the list. But instead, you selected (MFD) Miscellany for deletion and that's why the template was sent to the redirect target. –Ammarpad (talk) 14:22, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

I understand, thank you. I wish only to say that I chose Miscellany for deletion because the deletion of user talk pages is disputed and Redirects for discussion does not seem to adequately vet that nuance. Perhaps it would be better if some conditional parsing was added to compensate for an MFD nomination if such nominated page happens to be fashioned as a redirect? Normally I would simply remove the redirect markup leaving the talk page intact but the history of this page shows no other use for the page except that it was created as a redirect making it, in my opinion, eligible for miscellaneous deletion.--John Cline (talk) 15:27, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

This is extremely rare example (edge case), so it is not worth making the required software change. Have you ever seen another case where for some good reasons, the redirect should have been discussed at MfD and not RfD? Me I haven't, though I am not that longtimer.

Second, on the redirect itself, I think blanking it will have just suffice. –Ammarpad (talk) 16:04, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

I agree that this is an extremely rare example, probably not worth the effort needed to modify the software. I would only wish to add that my decision to ask for a discussion relates to the personal nature of linking an IP address (rightly or wrongly) with a registered user and the fact that merely removing the redirect markup would not remove that association from possibly being construed. Revision deletion would leave the talk page intact but with no discernible edits to otherwise scrutinize. So I put the page up for wider consideration. I will concede, nevertheless, that it is not a "possible bug" in the Twinkle software. Thank you for your help in making this clear.--John Cline (talk) 16:33, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Cannot request unprotection of article

Resolved

I tried to request unprotection of Category:User talk pages with Uw-spam2 notices but it says

Could not find relevant heading on WP:RPP. To fix this problem, please see How to fix RPP.

I read it and tried it but it did not work Abote2 (talk) 10:26, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

WP:Twinkle/Fixing RPP says that Twinkle expects a heading "== Current requests for edits to a protected page ==" to appear towards the end of WP:RPP. However, it does not. That may be the cause of the problem. — This, that and the other (talk) 13:13, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Restored ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:27, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Now working. –Ammarpad (talk) 17:49, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

R with possibilities

Just fyi, a major edit has taken place at {{R with possibilities}} that becomes noticable on redirects such as Watchmen (TV series). Now, when there is a draft article that corresponds to the title of the redirect, editors are informed so that a new article will not be created from the redirect. There has also been an edit to add Category:Category redirects with possibilities; however, that will probably be removed soon, since rcats are not used on soft redirects.  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  13:06, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Have CSD default to "Tag page only"?

Even though I'm an admin, I rarely delete pages on my own. Unless it's really blatenly obvious, I prefer to tag them for deletion and get another pair of eyes on it. Yesterday, I meant to tag a page, using the Twinkle CSD tool, and neglected to check the "Tag page only, don't delete" box, so it got deleted. Is there a way I can configure Twinkle to have this box checked by default? Actually, it should probably be checked by default for everybody. A general rule of U/I design is to have the default be the less destructive action. In the alternative, have a "are you sure" popup. Yeah, I know, you can just undelete it, but still better to do it right the first time. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:45, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

@RoySmith: Yeah, just go to WP:TWPREF and head to the CSD section. There should be an option Default to speedy tagging instead of outright deletion which I believe does what you like. There's also an option to require a "submit" click before deleting, that is not to delete right away. It looks like you've never customized your twinkle preferences, so there's a lot there you might like to look at! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:03, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

As for the UI/less destructive issue, sure maybe, but I think for most sysops, reviewing already-tagged pages is more common than tagging them. YMMV, so there is a preference option, but to me it makes sense. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:08, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Oh, wow. There are indeed a few options :-) Thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:08, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Template:Shared IP location

When adding a Template:Shared IP from Twinkle the location parameter is not available to be added. Could we please introduce this? --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:04, 18 July 2018 (UTC) (please  mention me on reply; thanks!)

Mark as patrolled

Please make marking a page as patrolled a configurable option for PROD as it is for CSD, AfD, & Tagging. This is the default action under the Page Curation tool and there has been a general consensus in favour of marking PRODed articles as patrolled over several discussions at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers. Marking the article patrolled saves the time of other patrollers and the article is tracked in the reviewer's PROD log. Thanks, Cabayi (talk) 20:26, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

• Second^Thanks, L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 21:31, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Warning templates

Hi, I would like to suggest that {{Uw-sandbox1}} {{Uw-sandbox2}} {{Uw-sandbox3}} {{Uw-sandbox4}} {{Uw-sandbox4im}} should be added to Twinkle. Regards, ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (alt) (talk to me) 03:14, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

• Support. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:55, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
• Support per this discussion, which led to this request. Adam9007 (talk) 22:24, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Cryptic error

While attempting to delete a page just now with Twinkle under criterion G7, the deletion failed with this unusual error in the Twinkle dialog: "Asking for reason: you didn't give one. I don't know... what with admins and their apathetic antics... I give up...". Vandalism? Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:27, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Tried again, same error. I was able to delete the page manually. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:29, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

This seems to be an issue with G7 in user talkspace. I think this is related to this lengthy discussion (and subsequent change). As far as I can make out, the issue was that Twinkle wouldn't pick up the G7 rationale. {{db-g7}} whines if the tagger leaves the rationale blank, but from some testing it doesn't work even if the rationale parameter is present. Pinging MusikAnimal who may be able to fix things up. As for the message itself, the cheekiness is an easter egg for when deletion fails. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 17:03, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

The relevant error is the first one you see, "Building deletion summary: Unable to generate summary from deletion template". As Amory says, something is up with {{db-g7}}. In the first line ({{#ifexpr:{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|{{ns:3}}|0|1}}+{{#if:{{{rationale|{{{reason|}}}}}}|1|0}}) it's doing some check for user talk pages which affects how the rationale is provided, probably because user talk pages aren't normally deleted. I don't have time to look into it, but if you can fix the template, Twinkle will work. The error you speak of indeed is an easter egg of sorts. However here it shouldn't be shown because it was the template, not you, who didn't provide deletion rationale. — MusikAnimal ^talk 18:04, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Ah, well that kinda makes sense then, this particular page was blanked so there was no template on it. The error confused me because Twinkle didn't give me the option to expand on the rationale behind selecting the G7 bullet. I suppose in this particular instance G6 might have been a better rationale. But for G7, can't Twinkle just fill in a default rationale, like "G7: author requests deletion or author blanked"? Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:14, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Well the idea is to centralize the rationale in the templates so that the community can maintain them instead of going through Twinkle developers. You don't need to tag the page first, Twinkle will auto-generate the rationale from the template. Here however the template refused to do this because it was the user talk namespace. You should be able to put it in your own rationale, though -- that much is a bug. I'll try to look into it soon — MusikAnimal ^talk 18:22, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Problem with my Twinkle

I've been having an issue with my Twinkle for quite some time. Half the time Twinkle doesn't load except for "last" and "unlink", and on diffs it lists the rollback options twice (like this). What is the problem? I have Twinkle enabled via my prefs not my .js file btw. Thanks, --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 02:10, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Edit summary for Vandalism

Can someone please clarify or explain the justification for

• While using the Red Vandalism button to revert, why isnt Twinkle saying in the edit summary that it is vandalism or something of that kind ? Reverting without clarifying is not correct i believe. --DBigXray 15:40, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

The standard rollback function doesn't clarify either though. It's true that other tools like STiki and Huggle clarify when it's vandalism, but edit-summary clarification is (in my opinion) more necessary with good faith edits, where the reasons for reverting are not so obvious to other people. Orphan Wiki 15:46, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Archived feature requests

I'd like to draw attention to two feature requests that were archived without discussion: Adding {{Welcome-anon-suboptimal}} to the welcome template options, and adding {{Sources exist}} to the article tagging options. Thanks! --Newbiepedian (talk · C · X! · L) 03:32, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

@Newbiepedian: You can configure your own templates at WP:TW/PREFS. Look for "Custom welcome templates to display" under "Welcome user", and "Custom article maintenance tags to display" under "Tag". The two templates you speak of aren't used very often, so we wouldn't want to include them in the standard Twinkle installation — MusikAnimal ^talk 17:04, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Add move requests

This would be very useful. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:39, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Restricting the use of the Unlink function

Resolved

Recently I blocked Ruben Argueda and mass-rollbacked their edits after they abused Twinkle's Unlink functionality to mass-remove a whole bunch of links to the Main Page. I see two threads here and here in the archives that have shown the potential damage (and time wasted) misuse of this functionality can cause.

I'd like to suggest restricting the use of the Unlink function to, say, extendedconfirmed users. Currently, autoconfirmed users can use the Unlink function, and it doesn't take much to get autoconfirmed (let's face it). Wikipedia:Twinkle/doc#Unlink writes: [Unlink] is often necessary after speedy deletion to prevent a page on a non-notable, vandalism, or other problematic topic from being recreated. It prevents a bunch of redlinks from showing up all over the place when you delete an article. Depending on the article being deleted, you may or may not want to unlink backlinks. I honestly can't see too many circumstances where unlink would be needed (if a vandal has added a whole bunch of links to their inappropriate page, those edits can easily be rolled back, especially if they made other unwanted changes), and in cases where it does need to be used, I don't see why an autoconfirmed user would be the one doing it (they can always manually remove the links if they have to, especially if it isn't linked to that many places). —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 23:52, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

I don't think it's a particularly common type of vandalism for new users — it requires the user to enter their preferences, learn about and choose twinkle, etc. (Without spilling the WP:BEANS, I'm surprised more LTA/socks don't do it) — but I'm open to this. I cleaned up a good faith user who was unlinking an article that had been temporarily deleted as part of a history merge, and the sysop tools make it not too hard, but it is a definite opportunity. Worth pinging Evad37 as the author of User:Evad37/Xunlink.js. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:12, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

The only time I've used it is to clean up after an article deletion. I'd support the proposed change. TJRC (talk) 02:49, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Seems reasonable to me; I've made the change for Xunlink. - Evad37 [talk] 03:00, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

This has been discussed several times, most recently I think was Wikipedia talk:Twinkle/Archive 39#Unlink abuse. There was some opposition but I think it's clear we need some sort of restriction, and extended confirmed seems appropriate (though it is specific to enwiki). I'll try to implement this soon. — MusikAnimal ^talk 20:23, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

 Done with Special:Diff/853456875 — MusikAnimal ^talk 22:57, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Add articles to AFD

Do you think you could implement a feature that would auto add an article to an existing AFD? --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:35, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

@Tyw7: please can you paraphrase what you mean? All steps of AfD are well handled by Twinkle, so it is not clear to me what you want. –Ammarpad (talk) 06:07, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

You know when sometimes articles are nominated together at afd, I was asking whether a feature could be implemented where if you provide a link to the AFD, twinkle tags the page automatically and sends a notice to the page creator. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 11:29, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Welcome not working for blank username pages

On a (redlinked) user page I'm only seeing ARV, Warn, TB, RPP and Unlink, no option for welcoming the new user. The welcome option does show up if I look at the menu on, for example, my own user talk page, so I'm guessing the difference is whether the page exists or not. Since welcomes are particularly valuable as the first message a user sees, if it's not showing up there I hope it can be made to. › Mortee _talk 00:03, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

It is not only on redlinked userpages, it is on all userpages. "Welcome" option only does show up when you're on the talkpage. Also if you're on userpage it is just easy, one-click away to reach the talkpage. –Ammarpad (talk) 06:11, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Ah, that's what I was doing wrong. I thought I was on the user talk page, but presumably I wasn't. I do see the link now. Sorry for my stupidity and thank you for explaining. › Mortee _talk 14:49, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Non-English contribs

While I'm on the subject of feature requests, can the templates for notifying users who make non-English contribs be added to Twinkle somehow? Calling {{subst:uselanguage|xx}} where xx is the ISO code of the user's language gives a message inviting the user to contribute to their own language Wikipedia (the notice is given in their language), or omitting xx gives a generic English warning message. These templates are single-issue despite being numbered, and I'm not sure if they should be considered notices or warnings. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:25, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Wrong Page Title in Warning Dialog

Sometimes when i get redirected to the Talk page of user after reverting their edit, the page title gets filled with '+'s instead of spaces. I wondered if there is any way to fix that issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zocke1r (talk • contribs) 18:34, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Possible issue with placing maintenance tag below hatnote

Considering that I've noticed lately that Twinkle has been placing maintenance tags under hatnotes when the hatnote is at the very top of the page, I think I just ran across a bug in this edit; Twinkle failed to place the maintenance tag below the transclusions of {{dynamic list}} at the top of the page. Steel1943 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:20, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Polite requests, rather than warnings

Could we add {{uw-unsourced0}} and other 0-level 'warnings' to Twinkle? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 14:56, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

The current list of 0-level templates is

• {{uw-unsourced0}}
• {{uw-vandalism0}}

More could be create I'm sure. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 06:31, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

I don't see that either are "more soft"/nicer than their 1-level warning counterparts, and thus I don't really see their necessity. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:40, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Well, basically {{uw-unsourced1}} implies a removal of content, while {{uw-unsourced0}} does not. This would be useful the person adding the warning, who may have added a supporting reference but informs the user to add them in the future, or judges the content to be good (if unsupported) and requests a reference, without having removed the content in the meantime. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 08:19, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Remove db person from a page

How can a db person template be removed from a page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sumypat (talk • contribs) 09:35, August 26, 2018 (UTC)

Erm click on edit and then remove the template. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 09:45, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 28 August 2018

Please change [[Wikipedia:Administrators|Wikipedia administrators]] to [[Wikipedia:Interface administrators|Wikipedia interface administrators]] as administrators can no longer edit user js pages --Danski454 (talk) 13:09, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

This page is not template-protected, and the only place where administrators are mentioned doesn't require that change. –Ammarpad (talk) 13:46, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

This is for Wikipedia:Twinkle/Preferences, which is template protected but the talk page redirects here. --Danski454 (talk) 13:58, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

You're right. But you should've mentioned that initially. –Ammarpad (talk) 14:08, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

 Done - FlightTime (open channel) 14:08, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Rollback link templates

• Template:Twinkle rollback
• Template:Twinkle rollback (AGF)
• Template:Twinkle rollback (VANDAL)
• Template:Twinkle vandalism
• Template:Twinkle restore this version

This edit to the page, as well as the fact that none of these pages are protected or have any documentation, seems to suggest that they aren't actually being used by the Twinkle interface. If this is indeed the case, it should be noted somewhere or the templates should be renamed to avoid confusion. -Sonicwave ^(talk) 22:33, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Looking at the source code, the templates do not do anything, as the UI is hard-coded. --Danski454 (talk) 14:19, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Paid editing

Can we have the {{uw-paid1}} series of templates added to the options in Twinkle? Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:12, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

This has been requested many times. GitHub issue — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:27, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

I think this really needs to be addressed now. What is the problem? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:37, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

​I've created a pull request for this. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:49, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Deployed! Thank you JJMC89 — MusikAnimal ^talk 23:15, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Db-disambig

The Twinkle interface gives a description for Template:Db-disambig that contradicts the description in the template itself and at WP:G6. Those pages specify that an article meets the criterion if it "disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in '(disambiguation)'..." Twinkle, however, says the criterion applies to pages that "disambiguate two or fewer existing Wikipedia pages and whose title ends in 'disambiguation'". I've inaccurately tagged Doctor McCoy (disambiguation) and Miljoenenjacht (disambiguation) in the last couple of days due to this misapprehension, so it would be helpful if the interface text could be changed to match the wording of the template and the policy. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 11:05, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

PR filed. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 17:37, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

inline text specific tagging

I like the current article maintenence tagging feature of Twinkle. Would it be possible and useful to add something similar for specific text, e.g., "citation needed", "clarify", "update after" etc? NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 11:44, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

mis-attribution

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T203583

The script appears to be acting up, attributing to the wrong editor. It seems to cite the previous editor to a page, instead of the actual editor leaving the message. See [4], [5]. Anyone else experiencing this? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:25, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

@78.26: Meet too [6] . Kpgjhpjm 15:30, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

I don't know if this is Twinkle-specific, but this issue is also discussed here. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:35, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

@78.26 and Kpgjhpjm: this isn't a twinkle problem but phab:T203583 Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:36, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Totally beyond my limited comprehension, but thank you very much! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:37, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Ha yes, I just noticed that: it's the name of the last person who revised the page; figured that out after RA0808 tried to impersonate me, haha. Given the thousands of blocks and warnings I've thrown around, I hope they fix this soon. Drmies (talk) 17:45, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Apparent failure to find matching month when adding a warning

Just had Twinkle create a new section rather than expanding a current one when adding a warning template. Not sure if it is a known problem and I just haven't run into it or if it is something new. Link to the diff where it happened. [7] {{u|zchrykng}} {T|C} 18:35, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

I've noticed in all my years using Twinkle, It will not add to a current section unless it's the last section on the talk page, otherwise it creates a new section. I agree it would be more efficient if it just continued to update an existing section, but I know nothing of the boundaries of coding. - FlightTime (open channel) 18:39, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Must have just not noticed it in the past. Probably works that way to make the coding simpler, I wonder how hard it would be to change and if it would be desirable. At least the message saying it couldn't find a heading matching the current month should be changed to clarify that it couldn't find it as the last section. {{u|zchrykng}} {T|C} 18:45, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Add template request

Can Template:Empty edit request be added to Twinkle's Single-issue notices section. - FlightTime (open channel) 19:48, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Vandal rollback doesn't actually open up a talk page

I've done rollback(VANDAL) several times with Twinkle already, but although it says it's opening up a talk page, I never actually go there. Instead, it puts me at the article's page. I'm not sure what is going on. Diamond Blizzard talk 16:38, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

If you've got popups blocked, it won't show the talk page. Primefac (talk) 16:42, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

I allowed popups from en.wikipedia.org, and the talk page did show up now. Thanks for the help! Diamond Blizzard talk 16:59, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Twinkle batch delete

The Twinkle batch delete feature is leaving a mangled edit summary. See for example User:Aguyintobooks/sandbox/redirect code. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:54, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

@Diannaa: Could that be in your Twinkle/Preferences settings ? Try removing the first [[ brackets. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:58, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Did you enter a reason in the box? What it looks like to me from your deletion log is that you accidentally pasted just the brackets into the reason box, or perhaps some weird text that got mangled in there? A quick test suggests it's working fine for me. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:02, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

It's working properly now; looks like I accidentally posted a mangled deletion reason in the box. Thank you! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:35, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Edit warring report

I am not being able to file 3RR report using Twinkle. Once I submit the querry, it freezes. --Saqib (talk) 17:28, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Please ping me if anyone respond to this. I'm not watching this page. --Saqib (talk) 17:38, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Are you still having this problem @Saqib:? Also what browser and OS are you using? –Ammarpad (talk) 13:13, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

@Ammarpad: I'm using Chrome on Mac. --Saqib (talk) 14:51, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Frustration at losing rollback edit summary

Whenever I'm in the middle of entering a detailed rollback explanation, and then need to switch to check something on another Wikipedia page, I find it extremely frustrating to return to complete the task with the relevant information or wikilink, only to find the rollback process has been aborted and my incomplete edit summary has been completely lost. Why is it not possible for editors to switch to another Tab or Window in desktop view without everything being lost? How best can this issue be addressed? Nick Moyes (talk) 14:56, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

This is due to a relatively recent (May 2017) change in chrome making it dismiss alert boxes when tabs are switched. Twinkle should now use one of the alternatives suggested by chrome. In firefox or in another browser you should be able to switch without an issue Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:05, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

@Galobtter: Thank you so much - this has been getting increasingly annoying, and I'd assumed it was a Wikipedia issue. I presume you meant "Twinkle users should now use one of the alternatives..." I'll have to swap to the 'fox. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:28, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Nick Moyes, what I mean is that twinkle should be coded to use a different way of asking for input for an edit summary that isn't dismissed when switching tabs Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:31, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Searchable alphabetical list

This is a searchable alphabetical list for Twinkle.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 19:00, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Extended content

{{advert}}: article is written like an advertisement {{all plot}}: article is almost entirely a plot summary {{autobiography}}: article is an autobiography and may not be written neutrally {{BLP sources}}: BLP article needs additional sources for verification {{BLP unsourced}}: BLP article has no sources at all (use BLP PROD instead for new articles) {{citation style}}: article has unclear or inconsistent inline citations {{cleanup}}: article may require cleanup {{cleanup-reorganize}}: article may be in need of reorganization to comply with Wikipedia's layout guidelines {{close paraphrasing}}: article contains close paraphrasing of a non-free copyrighted source {{COI}}: article creator or major contributor may have a conflict of interest {{condense}}: article may have too many section headers dividing up its content {{confusing}}: article may be confusing or unclear {{context}}: article provides insufficient context {{copy edit}}: article needs copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone, and/or spelling {{copypaste}}: article appears to have been copied and pasted from a source {{current}}: article documents a current event {{dead end}}: article has no links to other articles {{disputed}}: article has questionable factual accuracy {{essay-like}}: article is written like a personal reflection or opinion essay {{expand language}}: article can be expanded with material from a foreign-language Wikipedia {{expert needed}}: article needs attention from an expert on the subject {{external links}}: article's external links may not follow content policies or guidelines {{fansite}}: article resembles a fansite {{fiction}}: article fails to distinguish between fact and fiction {{globalize}}: article may not represent a worldwide view of the subject {{GOCEinuse}}: article is currently undergoing a major copy edit by the Guild of Copy Editors {{hoax}}: article may be a complete hoax {{improve categories}}: article may require additional categories {{incomprehensible}}: article is very hard to understand or incomprehensible {{in-universe}}: article subject is fictional and needs rewriting from a non-fictional perspective {{in use}}: article is undergoing a major edit for a short while {{lead missing}}: article has no lead section and one should be written {{lead rewrite}}: article lead section needs to be rewritten to comply with guidelines {{lead too long}}: article lead section is too long and should be shortened {{lead too short}}: article lead section is too short and should be expanded {{linkrot}}: article uses bare URLs for references, which are prone to link rot {{manual}}: article is written like a manual or guidebook {{merge}}: article should be merged with another given article {{merge from}}: another given article should be merged into this one {{merge to}}: article should be merged into another given article {{metricate}}: article exclusively uses non-SI units of measurement {{more footnotes}}: article has some references, but insufficient in-text citations {{new unreviewed article}}: mark your own article for later review {{news release}}: article reads like a news release {{no footnotes}}: article has references, but no in-text citations {{non-free}}: article may contain excessive or improper use of copyrighted materials {{notability}}: article's subject may not meet the notability guideline {{not English}}: article is written in a language other than English and needs translation {{one source}}: article relies largely or entirely upon a single source {{original research}}: article has original research or unverified claims {{orphan}}: article is linked to from no other articles {{overcoverage}}: article has an extensive bias or disproportional coverage towards one or more specific regions {{overlinked}}: article may have too many duplicate and/or irrelevant links {{overly detailed}}: article contains an excessive amount of intricate detail {{over-quotation}}: article contains too many or too-lengthy quotations for an encyclopedic entry {{peacock}}: article may contain peacock terms that promote the subject without adding information {{plot}}: plot summary in article is too long {{POV}}: article does not maintain a neutral point of view {{primary sources}}: article relies too heavily on primary sources, and needs secondary sources {{prose}}: article is in a list format that may be better presented using prose {{recentism}}: article is slanted towards recent events {{refimprove}}: article needs additional references or sources for verification {{rough translation}}: article is poorly translated and needs cleanup {{sections}}: article needs to be broken into sections {{self-published}}: article may contain improper references to self-published sources {{technical}}: article may be too technical for the uninitiated reader {{tense}}: article is written in an incorrect tense {{third-party}}: article relies too heavily on affiliated sources, and needs third-party sources {{tone}}: tone of article is not appropriate {{too few opinions}}: article may not include all significant viewpoints {{uncategorized}}: article is uncategorized {{under construction}}: article is currently in the middle of an expansion or major revamping {{underlinked}}: article may require additional wikilinks {{undue}}: article lends undue weight to certain aspects of the subject but not others {{unfocused}}: article lacks focus or is about more than one topic {{unreferenced}}: article has no references at all {{unreliable sources}}: article's references may not be reliable sources {{undisclosed paid}}: article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments {{update}}: article needs additional up-to-date information added {{very long}}: article is too long {{weasel}}: article neutrality is compromised by the use of weasel words

Have the "notify the page creator if possible" option be unticked by default when someone tags a user talk page for deletion using Twinkle

Hi everyone! I'm starting a discussion here to discuss and receive input from others regarding an idea to implement a modification to Twinkle's source code so that the option to "notify the page creator if possible" is unticked by default when an editor uses Twinkle to tag a user talk page for speedy deletion. Over the years that I've been reverting vandalism and disruption, leaving warnings on user talk pages, using Twinkle, Huggle, and other tools to help automate redundant tasks in this area, as well as responding to questions and requests for speedy deletion, I've noticed that I (as well as many others) will be the recipients of speedy deletion notifications when one isn't necessary at all. Most of the time, it's due to someone tagging a user talk page for speedy deletion. I believe that unticking this option by default in this specific scenario will yield positive benefits - mainly, a reduction of time being wasted remedying the "issue", and many less users being confused as to why they were left a notification about the speedy deletion of someone's user talk page.

If you refer to this discussion on my user talk page, you'll see an example where having this option unticked by default would have saved both time and confusion of an editor who, after tagging a user talk page for speedy deletion, became confused and thought he had made a mistake after realizing that the notification was sent to me. I happened to be very familiar with this ongoing "issue" (for lack of a better word), so I had no problem explaining to the editor what happened and why. Had I been someone new or someone not aware or familiar of the process and what happens when Twinkle is used to tag and notify the creator of a speedy deletion, they would have been left confused as well.

I'll quote what I said in response to Knightrises10, the editor who started the relevant discussion on my user talk page: The actual fix to this "issue" is to have Twinkle's source code updated so that when someone tags a user talk page for deletion, the option to "notify the creator" is unticked by default. In the situation where user talk pages are tagged for deletion, a notification isn't necessary - the editor that the user talk page belongs to is going to see that you tagged it. I'd say that 99% of the time, the creator of someone's user talk page is either a random editor who happened to message them first (a notification would just confuse the living daylights out of them), or it'll be the editor that the user talk page belongs to (which results in a notification... being left on the same exact page you just tagged.... which is pointless).

I wanted to start a discussion here and gather some thoughts and input from others. I believe that implementing this very small change will result in significant time and confusion savings by the community while making a very minimal change to how Twinkle operates. In the worst case scenario, the user will just have to tick that option if they're tagging a user talk page for speedy deletion and they actually do want Twinkle to send a notification to the page creator (which in my experience is not needed in most if not nearly all cases).

What are your thoughts? Does this sound like a good idea? Why? Why not? Input, thoughts, comments, and feedback would be much appreciated. Thank you, everyone! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:35, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Twinkle already checks if a user talk page was created by the user in question, and will not notify them in that case. In this situation, though, I don't follow the benefit in your proposal. Unless I'm forgetting something, most cases will be a situation like this, where the issue is not (un)ticking of the box, but rather that the speedy nomination was improper and instead they should have reverted. He's a new user, I'm not trying to call him out or anything, but in theory most user talk pages created by someone else will be warnings/blocks/welcomes, in which case most instances of subsequently inappropriate material should be reverted not CSDed; or vandalism/attacks/etc., in which case, yes, we do want to notify the original creator, if only to have the note in their talk page. I guess what I'm saying is that if the issue is that new users are improperly speedy tagging pages, the remedy is not to tag them, not to change Twinkle. I would hazard a guess that you;re probably the epicenter of this, as someone who warns/blocks a ton of editors and deals with a ton of new users. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:07, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Protection requests contains inaccurate option.

WP:RPP states that protection requests that "[appear] to be intended to resolve a content dispute" are invalid and will be closed. Unfortunately, Twinkle's options for protection request submissions contains the false option "Content dispute/Edit warring". Twinkle should not imply that this is an acceptable justification for protection. ViperSnake151  Talk  21:33, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

The operative different there is that requests that appear intended to resolve a content dispute should be read in the context of the previous sentence in the RFPP header: editors should not consider requesting page protection as a method for continuing an argument from elsewhere nor as a venue for starting a new discussion regarding article content. Such requests are indeed invalid, as protection should not be used to resolve a content dispute in favor of one side or another (or another...). On the other hand, protection may indeed be used to stop the disruption caused by the dispute. If you read the policy at Wikipedia:Protection policy#Content disputes, you'll note it says administrators have the discretion to temporarily fully protect an article to end an ongoing edit war. I'll grant you the wordings aren't the most distinct possible, but the intention of the header is to discourage requests desirous of sallying protection into the edit war. Twinkle seems correct. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:55, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Amorymeltzer, I think it’s in relation to this decline I made at RFPP earlier. The background there being cluebot improperly reverted a good faith change as vandalism once and then the new account restored the new target of a redirect and ViperSnake151 restored the original target. That’s a content dispute where no dispute resolution has been tried and not even really an edit war considering the original revert was a bot misclassifying something as vandalism.

VS151: most admins are going to be reluctant to use the blunt force of full protection for something this minor, and if it did get past 3RR blocks would generally be used first. While there is considerable discretion, full protection is generally used for more complex situations that short blocks of one or two accounts won’t solve (i.e. multi-party edit wars, slow burning edit wars, etc.) TonyBallioni (talk) 02:29, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Req: Add {{old prod full}} to talk page when PRODding article

I'd like to request that Twinkle add the {{old prod full}} template to an article's Talk page when Twinkle is used to PROD an article. Ideally, it would populate the nom, nomdate and nomreason parameters, but even a bald {{old prod full}} would be helpful.

An article can only be subjected to PROD once, so it's very helpful to have that easily found, and it's tedious and mistake-prone to look through the history. TJRC (talk) 23:27, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

...and make it optional to mark the PRODded article as patrolled, PLEASE. My previous request got archived without any response. Cabayi (talk) 13:51, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Support for {{old prod full}} would be marvellous. Sam Sailor 00:18, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

• Support Clearly necessary. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  00:57, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

AfD'ing a redirect leads to the target article being tagged

Noticed that, when you are on a page history site, the XFD function defaults to AFD. I wanted to RFD the redirect The Witcher 4, switched to XFD from the history tab and did not check whether the correct category was selected (because it had always been right previously). Subseuqently, an AFD page was created for the redirect, while the redirect's target, The Witcher received the AFD tag. This raises three problems:

1. An AFD page is created for a redirect, while it should have gone to RFD.
2. The page supposed to be deleted is not tagged for deletion.
3. A page that is not supposed to be deleted is tagged for deletion, but leading to a redlink (as no AFD page for the target article's name existed).

Please tell me if any of the mentioned behaviors were intentional or actually bugs that should be fixed. Lordtobi (✉) 22:59, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

It wasn't a bug, but mistake from your side. See bug Archive_40#Possible bug. When you opened the Twinkle dialog, you must scroll through and select (RFD) Redirect for discussion which is the 7th and last option in the list. But instead, you left the default selection at first option which is (AfD) Articles for deletion and that's why the template was sent to the redirect target. –Ammarpad (talk) 06:32, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

I am aware that AFD was selected in the end (although the top entry is usually the correct one), but shouldn't it be considered a bug that when AFD'ing a redirect, the target page is tagged while the redirect is actually listed? You might have to consider that newcomers could think AFD is the correct place for redirects. Lordtobi (✉) 13:27, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

"[B]ut shouldn't it be considered a bug that when AFD'ing a redirect...". No, you shouldn't AfD a redirect, AfD is only meant for articles. On your second hypothesis, can you give example of the newcomers who confused AfD and RfD? –Ammarpad (talk) 13:46, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Twinkle doesn't always write article names correctly

I've noticed that sometimes, in a warning message, Twinkle will put plus signs "+" between the words in a link to a multi-word article title. However, this means the link will not work. See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:24.214.62.217&diff=prev&oldid=862977664&diffmode=source https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:68.192.7.78&type=revision&diff=860506528&oldid=860504591&diffmode=source https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:71.83.226.149&type=revision&diff=860362194&oldid=860362151&diffmode=source However, it often works correctly: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:2600:1016:B016:EFC7:F017:4089:FAFB:FE86&oldid=860362080 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:66.102.146.127&oldid=862791172 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:2600:6C4A:1C00:AB3:1DD4:7B53:F268:6B94&oldid=862790126 I'm not sure what the problem is or why it happens only sometimes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diamond Blizzard (talk • contribs) 23:15, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Template:Incomplete

Please note this template has now been deleted, per TfD. Please make any updates as needed to Twinkle. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:02, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Template:Pp-pc1

Template:Pp-pc1 was moved to Template:Pp-pc, per Template talk:Pp-pc#Requested move 5 October 2018. – wbm1058 (talk) 20:33, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

My Twinkle is bugged out.

For some reason twinkle isn't working for me correctly, what should I do? Govvy (talk) 08:58, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Govvy, First, try bypassing or clearing your cache. If that doesn’t fix the problem, please reply here with details of what is going on. Screenshots and the output of your JavaScript console log are also often helpful. —AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 14:03, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

I cleared my cache, but there is still an issue with rollback not working for me. Govvy (talk) 12:16, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

I have to restart my browser a lot these days. Didn't use to be like this. I don't know if it's because I don't have twinkle enabled the new way, but older embedded code? Govvy (talk) 12:46, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Twinkle not logging some of my CSD noms

Very recently, Twinkle hasn't been logging some of my speedy deletion nominations even though I haven't changed anything on my Twinkle preferences. E.g. I tagged Draft:Radio pluggers for G11 and G12 with Twinkle but it wasn't automatically logged at User:Bennv3771/CSD log and I had to do it manually. Yet just a couple of minutes after that, I tagged Draft:Baabroz The Design House for G11 and G12 with Twinkle and it gets logged automatically. Any way to fix this problem? Bennv3771 (talk) 13:06, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

• I don't know if this is your issue but when you move away from the tagged page before the various entries are complete the last item - you CSD log ~ does not get posted. Occasionally I get an API error and no CSD log update. CSD log is nice to have but not worth a milanual update for the very occasional misfire in my view. Legacypac (talk) 15:30, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

• What Legacypac said. Your CSD log is large, so it will take more seconds than usual and even upto a minute to finish all the steps, and you're closing the window/tab before that final step completed. –Ammarpad (talk) 15:36, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you for the help. That is probably the problem... can't believe I didn't think of that! Bennv3771 (talk) 15:40, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I forgot about too large a log. Move your CSD log to something like User:Bennv3771/CSD_log 2 and change the resulting redirect to a link at the top of the log page. Performance will immediately increase and new CSDs will continue to be listed. See User:Legacypac/CSD_log for an example. I find that over 1000 entries on the page pretty much breaks the logging function. Legacypac (talk) 16:43, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

@Legacypac: Yeah I'll do that. Thanks. Bennv3771 (talk) 01:15, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

AFD at 0000 GMT fails

I got an error from an AFD attempt which said that the script failed to insert the link to the AFD immediately below the header line in the log. It said that this may happen if someone has deleted that line, in which case it needs to be re-inserted. I think that there is another possible cause. That is that I had the AFD open at 0000 GMT. If a bot switches the daily log at 0000 GMT, then any AFD that is being opened during that time will fail. I don't consider this a bug in the usual sense, but would suggest that the error message state that this behavior is expected if the editor is typing in the AFD rationale at 0000 GMT. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:27, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Twinkle determines the correct day's log according to the date, so that's not the cause. Twinkle checks for a newline after the top comment, but for the 19th, User:Cyberbot I added the first entry, and did so without adding a newline. Hence, twinkle didn't match the regex appropriately, and your entry wasn't logged. Raised it with the botop. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:06, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Buggy still,

HI've been having problems with Twinkle a lot recently, need to restart my browser a lot. I was wondering if anyone can help at all, I have twinkle installed the old way User:Govvy/monobook.js, and not selected on preferences. Please help wikipedia... you're my only hope!! Govvy (talk) 20:56, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Your problem is apparently straightforward. Just delete that line in your monobook.js and then select Twinkle from your preferences. That will solve most of your problems if not all.–Ammarpad (talk) 21:17, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Well, I did that, but we will see, it was working fine for a long time, don't know what changes were done to mess it up how I had it installed. Govvy (talk) 21:44, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Nope, didn't help, still can't use rollback correctly with twinkle, it's bugged out for sure. I will click rollback and it will hang. Govvy (talk) 09:11, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

@Ammarpad: Is there any known reasons why rollback function in twinkle fails to work at times, because that's the problem I have, vandal rollback and rollback AGF I don't have a problem with, just rollback itself. Govvy (talk) 12:49, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Twinkle dropdown in Vector

I don't normally use Vector, but I've recently been viewing pages with it for a coding project, and in the course of that I noticed an issue with the Twinkle dropdown that is created at the end of the right-hand set of tabs. The native p-cactions dropdown enters a forced expanded state when clicked, possibly for the benefit of keyboard and touch device users who cannot "mouse" over it. Twinkle's p-twinkle dropdown, however, does not. It's missing the large invisible checkbox that this behavior depends on. This is an <input> with the class vectorMenuCheckbox and the attribute type="checkbox". It should be fairly easy to add this to the relevant section of JavaScript (the CSS styles attached to that class do everything else). The p-cactions checkbox also has an aria-labelledby attribute that goes with the id of the <h3>, which you might want to copy as well (more on aria-labelledby here). AFAICT it's not possible to use the Twinkle dropdown when navigating with the keyboard, though I'm not a keyboard user and I don't know if any Twinkle users are.

Less importantly, "TW" changes color from #444 to #222 when hovered over, while "More" does not. I'm not sure why that is -- it may be due to the latter text being covered by the checkbox. ♫ekips39 (talk)❀ 04:06, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Move of Template:History merge

I have moved Template:History merge from Template:Histmerge. Bsherr (talk) 23:40, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Tray notifcations vs Talk Page messages

In follow up to the above, is there a reason why Twinkle uses Talk page notifcations, rather than tray notifications for some issues related to media files?

I've sometimes been more quick to respond to tray or bell notifications, than I am to changes I only notice due to watchlisting some media file.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:10, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Also Some users don't want to be bothered by boiler plate messages on a talk page, but would like to be aware of when pages they've edited have changed, or media they've upload has been tagged in specific ways. using tray or bell notifications would in these instances be more appropriate. Rather than a talk page message for say a file being tagged for CSD F4. You'd get a "tray notifcation" giving a link to the media file, and the CSD criteria that needed resolving. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:16, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Template:checkuserblock-account

Hi, I've sandboxed a change to this template so that it supports a duration parameter. It is sometimes used when blocks aren't indefinite! So this note is twofold - firstly, consensus for the change, and secondly, the new parameter might want building into Twinkle at some point. ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 21:34, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Feature request - Peer review

I am wondering if it's possible to add a feature to Twinkle to close peer reviews. This would need to do two things, and ideally would have an additional option to leave a message. Process planned would be:

1. Reviewer goes to a peer review page, then selects "Twinkle - close review"
   • Ideally, an option will be given for the reviewer to input a message or select from a dropdown menu of options for why the review is closed, with a message added to the peer review page: closed for inactivity (autoselected), closed as direct nomination (in which case this shouled be included at the end of the peer review page: {{Wikipedia:Peer review/Direct nomination| --~~~~}}, or can leave an individualised message
2. Twinkle will:
   • On the peer review page, replace {{Peer review page|topic = X}} with {{subst:PR/archive}}
   • On the article's talk page, replace the {{Peer review}} tag on the article's talk page with {{Old peer review|archive = N}}, where N is the number of the peer review discussion page above (e.g. 1 for /archive1).
3. An optional feature to include would be to insert this peer review in the article {{Article history}} template on the talk page if there is one.

Such a feature would be MOST appreciated by peer reviewers and save us a lot of time :). --Tom (LT) (talk) 08:01, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

@Tom (LT): Twinkle is not used for such tasks at the moment. You'll likely get useful response if you ask Evad37 the author of XFDcloser script which does tasks similar to what you're requesting. –Ammarpad (talk) 19:27, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

@Ammarpad thanks for the help, will ask. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:11, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Do not mark as 'patrolled' when adding CSD tag.

Per this discussion, we are going to stop marking CSDs and PRODs as 'reviewed' in the new pages feed at New Page Patrol, to stop things falling through the cracks if the CSD tags are inappropriately removed or the PROD removal is missed.

Twinkle currently does not mark PRODs as 'patrolled' but does mark CSDs as 'patrolled'. We need this to change so that CSD's are no longer marked as 'patrolled'. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 16:58, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Insertcleverphrasehere, it's already an option (like I already told you). Cabayi (talk) 17:16, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Yes, but not marking as reviewed should be the default. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 17:28, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

 Done This has been deployed. — MusikAnimal ^talk 16:16, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

RPP function bug

When I request PP for a page with twinkle, it adds to WP:RFPP "=== [[:Example]] === * {{pagelinks|Example}} " and then the reason and the sig. This should be changed to add |1=Example instead of |Example, because when RPPing a page with an equal sign ("="), it breaks the template. See this diff for the problem when requesting page protection of 2 + 2 = 5. L293D (☎ • ✎) 13:49, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Fixed. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 22:17, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Batch mode?...

Currently TWINKLE works on a per page mode, However in some instances (Such as image review) this means that a contributor ends up with a "wall of notifications", which has been described as annoying and can be counter productive. (Some templates like Bsr already support multiple images in a single notifcation.)

At WP:VPT there is currently a request to port Visual File Changes from Commons back to English Wikipedia. This is something that should be combined with a rewrite and extension of TWINKLE so that it can be used in a "batch mode" and thus a contributor need only get one (albiet a large) notification about pages or media with a specific issue.

Ideally, a fully developed batch mode would enable a contributor to patrol through an entire list of pages or media ( such as those in a category), and as well as batch tagging the pages media with the appropriate issue templates, TWINKLE would group up any required notifcations that are needed into appropriate batched notifications (i.e one notification per user on a specfic issue) or better one composite summary notification with sections (ideallyu comprising collapsed lists or tables of pages or media affected) for the relevant issues. This would let contributors and patrollers that do 'sweep' style efforts to generate ONE notifcation to a contributor or uploader instead of several, and thus avoid "wall of enforcement" notifcations that aren't necessarily going to be read. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:07, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

This would require a lot of rework and would work better in a different tool, and we would need someone who wants to make such a mode. Twinkle is meant as a jack-of-all-trades and less as a specialized tool. --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 17:44, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Such a mode is needed to reduce the incidence of 'tag-bombs' where an admin or patroller needs to make a LOT of notifications. Rather than leaving a LOT of virtually identical and lengthy notifications, wouldn't it be better to consolidate the notifcations into a single list, and send ONE notification instead? (Which is what Visual File Changes on commons achieves)ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:44, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

The problem is you're equating Commons need with Wikipedia's. On Commons, a person can uploads 100 copyrighted images and then the need to delete them all arises. Then a tool to notify the editor once and also do the other work is needed. That doesn't happen on Wikipedia often, if any. You cannot create 100 pages that are all eligible for speedy at the same time, the reason is obvious and hence lack of need of such tool.–Ammarpad (talk) 12:04, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Feature request

Is there any way to add warnings via Twinke to folk who repeatedly jump the ACPERM queue. In this instance where the article has been moved from Draft to article space, moved back to Draft as it has a canker, then moved back to article space. I would like to warn the editor. I don't even know if this is policy. But it needs to be stopped, as it is a waste, unproductive, and pushes terrible article into article space, that shouldn't be here. If this is not the place to post, please tell me. Thanks. scope_creep (talk) 12:28, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Edit warring

Hi, When I file an edit warring report - I fill out everything as normal .. but when I click "submit query" it just blanks out - Nothing happens and repeating it still does nothing,
Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 18:48, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Not sure what the issue was but it now seems to have been fixed as edit warring reports go through no probs - Thanks to whoever had fixed it, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 20:20, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

This is most likely because of phab:T197486, which is beyond our control. Basically the API query the edit warring report module uses will sometimes time out. It will work for some users, other users it will not. The current belief is an upgrade of the database servers will fix it but there's no indication of when this will happen. Sorry! — MusikAnimal ^talk 18:51, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Template:New unreviewed article

I have nominated Template:New unreviewed article (which is used in twinkle) for deletion; see discussion. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:24, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

The template discussion has now been closed as "delete" so please make changes to Twinkle as necessary as I am going to start to orphan the template. Pkbwcgs (talk) 06:51, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Template:New unreviewed article has still not been removed from Twinkle's "tag" tab. Pkbwcgs (talk) 17:07, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

It should be deployed soon, I've pushed the commit to the repo. --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 17:19, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

 Done Deployed. --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 14:00, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Subtle Vandalism Template

Hi there! I think Twinkle should have a subtle vandalism template. The message it gives is different than the regular vandalism template. Should Twinkle add this template? INeedSupport^{(Care free to give me support?)} 18:10, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Remove links to everywhere

I've never used the "remove links from everywhere" yet I think I have a case for it, so I'm getting some feedback before hitting a button that will cause hundreds or possibly thousands of edits (just about 1200).

WP:Articles for deletion/GameZone resulted in a delete for notability reasons (and I think that deletion was correct). It is currently linked in several hundred or thousand pages for its use as a cited work. What is the edit rate at which this occurs (possibly add to WP:Twinkle/doc)? From the image, it does not look like the edits are tagged with a bot tag. Given the number of links, would it be more reasonable to remove the redlinks with a bot (or at least, a bot account)? I guess it also does not distinguish between links in main and outside mainspace (I get to choose which pages are executed against). --Izno (talk) 16:49, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Vaguely related discussion back when it was actually deleted; Username Needed did around half a thousand at the time, possibly through XFDC. AFAIK the edits will happen as quickly as possible ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:54, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Wishlist proposal on one-click inline cleanup tags

It would be easier to do this with Twinkle

The current Wishlist Survey has a proposal to make it as easy to tag (with "citation needed" etc.) as it is to rvv. This should be faster than writing custom comments in a good-faith revert, and there is evidence[8] that it will cause more new editors to fix their own edits, learning editing skills and improving content in the process. Please consider voting on the wish. HLHJ (talk) 19:12, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

TW is adding vandals to my watchlist

Every time I warn/report vandals their talk page is added to my watchlist. I checked the TW preferences and I don't see a way to turn this off. - ZLEA _Talk\^Contribs 01:59, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

ZLEA, In the Warn user preferences, uncheck "Add user talk page to watchlist when notifying". --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 02:31, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) ZLEA, Do you have Add user talk page to watchlist when notifying in the Warn user section selected? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 02:33, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Twinkle dropdown in Vector

My section of the same name was archived with no response. Should I post this issue somewhere else? ♫ekips39 (talk)❀ 05:59, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

I had a go at it. See https://github.com/azatoth/twinkle/pull/462. SD0001 (talk) 16:01, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Twinkle slowing down?

I tag dozens (hundreds?) of pages for deletion and lately, Twinkle has been running very slowly. It takes about 2 minutes for the page to be tagged and entered into my CSD log page when it used to just be less than 30 seconds. Is there a problem with the script or is it my old laptop? I use to have no problems at all but lately, it's been working at a crawl. I haven't altered any setting in my Preferences (or even looked at my Preferences!).

Thanks for any advice you might have. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:53, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Your CSD log is too large at over 1,000kB. You should consider pruning it greatly. For instance by creating User:Liz/CSD log/Archive and moving all log details prior to October 2018. –Ammarpad (talk) 08:49, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

This seems to be a very common problem. I guess it'd good to make Twinkle check the size of the log and alert the user if it is too large. SD0001 (talk) 11:10, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Agreed, I try to "prune" mine once a month and have no issues at all (and with an 10 year old laptop :P ). - FlightTime Public (open channel) 11:18, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you so much, Ammarpad, SD0001 and FlightTime Public! The size of my CSD log page would never had occurred to me. But it is enormous as I spend a lot of my time tagging old categories. I'll take care of that today. Thanks again for sharing your ideas. I'm glad I posted about it as it has been driving me crazy. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:59, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

You're very welcome. - FlightTime (open channel) 02:05, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

mw.util.jsMessage

Hi, Twinkle uses mw.util.jsMessage() to show the user an error message. This function was deprecated in 2012, and will soon not be working. There's a migration guide that explains how to use mw.notify instead. See phab:T193901 for more information. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 08:55, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

P-Batch Page Limit

Is there a limit to the number of pages that can be protected in one request using p-batch? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:40, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

I don't think so: sysops have noratelimit. From experience with dbatch, I can tell you that it sometimes takes a few tries, although I think that may be mostly a deletion-specific issue. It can take a while, though. I'd assume it would progressively slow down and eventually get halted by your browser. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 17:54, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Gonzo fan2007, I'm curious, is there any reason you're asking? Galobtter (pingó mió) 18:26, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Galobtter, see Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Index#Possible Workaround for some background. I did some digging and it appears that 5,000 is the limit set by Twinkle. In order to do more you have to change your settings. I was able to complete about 2,400 in one request; it just took a few minutes. Cheers, « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 19:05, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Redirect tagging request

Would it be possible to add {{R from incorrect name}} to the Redirect tagging functions? (If it's there, I can't find it.) Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 22:15, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

 Done --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 06:15, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Rollback malfunction

This has been happening for at least several days, if I click the blue rollback link in twinkle, I get a page titled Wikipedia:(title of article on which I tried to use twinkle)&twinklerevert=norm which tells me that wikipedia does not have a project page with the name (title of article on which I tried to use twinkle)&twinklerevert=norm. And if I use the red vandalism button It tells me that wikipedia does not have a project page with the title: (title of article on which I tried to use twinkle)&twinklerevert=vand. Everything works fine if I am looking at the diff, but I have the problems when I try to click twinkle's rollback links from someones contribs page. Tornado chaser (talk) 18:52, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Discussion already ongoing here Problem when clicking on "vandalism" link while examining user contributions - FlightTime (open channel) 18:57, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Twinkle itself seems to be malfuctioning. I am not able to ARV anyone. --Kailash29792 (talk) 07:00, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

• Tried reporting this through Phabricator https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T210500 but they weren't interested. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:24, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

• @Andy Dingley: It's not that no one was interested, the bug was closed as invalid as there's no problem from MediaWiki side. You (or anyone else) have to report the problem to the Twinkle maintainers on GitHub; assuming they're not aware of the issue. –Ammarpad (talk) 19:00, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

• @Andy Dingley and Tornado chaser: Changes are deployed, courtesy of Amory and MusikAnimal. --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 06:33, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Problem when clicking on "vandalism" link while examining user contributions

I am seeing a problem when clicking on the "[vandalism]" rollback link while examining user contributions. The link does not perform a rollback – instead, it tries to create a new article called with the old article name plus "&twinklerevert=vand" tacked on the end. Binksternet (talk) 21:41, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

I'm having the same issue. - FlightTime Phone (open channel) 21:50, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Consider making an issue on the GitHub repository. --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 14:00, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

This also occurs for the normal rollback feature on Twinkle, both on PC and mobile. aNode (discuss) 16:30, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I cannot make heads or tails the git cite. - FlightTime Phone (open channel) 16:48, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

I have just used the Vandalism feature, and also the normal rollback and Good faith rollback on TW, and it all seems to be working fine for me. Orphan Wiki 21:00, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

@Orphan Wiki: This issue only affects the "rollback" and "vandalism" links on a user's contributions page. The ones seen when viewing a diff are working fine. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 23:49, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

@Binksternet, K6ka, and FlightTime Phone: what browser and version are you using? — MusikAnimal ^talk 02:10, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Never mind, it's not your browser (broken on modern browsers too). We're looking into it. — MusikAnimal ^talk 02:15, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks in advance. Binksternet (talk) 04:11, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

+1, fwiw. Just came here to report the same thing. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 02:52, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Yes, it's still broken. When looking at a user's contributions, the rollback and vandalism links are not working. Binksternet (talk) 00:30, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

I am having the same issue. Tornado chaser (talk) 03:46, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

I'm still having this problem. Doug Weller talk 21:08, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

This should be fixed now ~ Amory (u • t • c) 02:41, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Yup, now it works, thanks! Tornado chaser (talk) 04:16, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Yay! Thanks to whoever fixed it! Binksternet (talk) 04:41, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

New R4 speedy deletion criterion

Per this discussion, a new speedy deletion criterion, WP:R4, has been established. If possible, please integrate the {{Db-r4}} tag into Twinkle; this tag should only be placed on redirects in the "File:" namespace. Steel1943 (talk) 08:19, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

This has beed deployed ​ –Ammarpad (talk) 05:38, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Template:Split media

It says on the template to send you a notification, if it is nominated for deletion. Apologies that I hadn't done this earlier. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:24, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

 On hold Until consensus emerges. --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 08:22, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

 Done --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 20:03, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Db-blankdraft

Per this discussion, {{db-blankdraft}} has been merged into CSD G13. Please integrate this into Twinkle. CoolSkittle (talk) 15:26, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

 Done Courtesy of siddharthvp. --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 20:04, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

…And I nearly accidentally nominated some G11s under G13 <:)´ ^Thanks, L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 23:07, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Most CSDs not being added to log

I've noticed that when tagging a file for dated speedy deletion, that the process box gets stuck on "Adding entry to userspace log: Retrieving page..." and never adds to the CSD log or even closes. All OK for a normal CSD. Is this a bug or my setup gone awry? Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:53, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

I bet your log is too long. Go to User:Ronhjones/CSD_log and move it to User:Ronhjones/CSD_log 1 then go back to User:Ronhjones/CSD_log and replace the #REDIRECT with See also: so people can follow the link to the older log but you will not send the script there. Everything will greatly speed up. Repeat every thousand or so CSDs. Legacypac (talk) 00:58, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Only 3 items in log User:Ronhjones/CSD log. I thought of that already. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:35, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Have you cleared the cache? Is logging enabled for the criteria you're nominating under? --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 18:31, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

As one can see in User:Ronhjones/CSD_log, it's quite happy logging F9 CSD, I just tried another F11, and it gets as far as "Adding entry to userspace log: Retrieving page..." and then nothing happens, window never closes. Settings are to log all CSD except U1. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:12, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

This bug crept in in September as part of an effort to improve CSD logging. Let's see. SD0001 (talk) 19:46, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

 Fixed The fix should be deployed soon. SD0001 (talk) 21:40, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

@SD0001: Which commit? --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 06:00, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

@QEDK: https://github.com/azatoth/twinkle/pull/461. SD0001 (talk) 08:07, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

 Done and thanks ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:08, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Refimprove

Per this discussion, {{refimprove}} has moved to {{More citations needed}}. Please integrate this into Twinkle. Jalen D. Folf (talk) 01:25, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Done already. SD0001 (talk) 07:51, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Can it skip some user don't get notice

Some user don't want me to sent any [9] notice, is there any to avoid?Willy1018 (talk) 23:06, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

The users should be notified, regardless. They can remove the notice just like your example did. (IMO) - FlightTime Public (open channel) 23:27, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

@Willy1018: Just untick the "Notify page creator if possible" option when PRODing. SD0001 (talk) 07:49, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

re: @FlightTime Public:. That's not correct. Since they explicitly asks not be notified, that is what to be honored, regardless. No policy, that say they must be notified. re: @Willy1018: as said above, when you're to PROD an article they created you've the option to not notify them by unticking it. –Ammarpad (talk) 08:32, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ammarpad: Hence the (IMO) at the end of my original comment. I never said there was a policy. Please don't say someone is "quoting/pointing to" a policy when it's purposely made clear they are not. - FlightTime (open channel) 14:38, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

@FlightTime: I said "No policy, that say they must be notified" after you contended they should be notified regardless of their request not be, that's against their wish. Do not put words in people's mouth, my comment was a statement of fact. –Ammarpad (talk) 17:40, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, but I think there is the way to avoid it. Can it add it to twinkleoption?Willy1018 (talk) 08:56, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

So you are asking for an option to disable notifying people in a pre-configured list? That'd would require quite a bit of work, and I'm not sure if it'd be very useful. SD0001 (talk) 10:23, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Theoretically there could be a category users opt-in to that Twinkle could check, but I don't think it's a good idea. Regardless, this isn't particularly common. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:55, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Surely there is a way, but the thing is we don't need it. You can either choose to inform or not inform and that's all this requires. --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 16:40, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

testwiki:User talk:Ankry

Ankry has asked me to protect his user talk because Twinkle's message delivery on testwiki is annoying him. I believe twinkle on testwiki should suppress the notification by default, and manually toggled if needed. Any suggestions? (I've fully protected them for 3 months, freeing him from the same problem while you work on this) — regards, Revi 14:22, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

I confirm. Ankry (talk) 14:23, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

​Infinitely sorry Ankry this is almost entirely my fault: I was using testwiki:Page542 as a testing ground, and occasionally forgot to turn notifications off. I've created testwiki:Page4242 with the intent to use that exclusively, and have deleted the two pages you've been notified about lately. You can also turn off those notifications in your testwiki:Special:Preferences, but again, totally my fault. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:01, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer:, Talkpage post notification is non-negotiable :). It cannot be turned off. –Ammarpad (talk) 06:23, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Article sandbox

The cited article sandbox has been deleted. Is there anywhere else to test article tagging? Kranix (talk | contribs) 16:27, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/sandbox, with lowercase s, still exists, you can use it. –Ammarpad (talk) 17:09, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Minor edit to Twinkle

Template:Refimprove has been moved to Template:More citations needed. When tagging via Twinkle, the edit summary still refers to refimprove, can it be updated please? Joseph2302 (talk) 16:33, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

It's been committed. --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 17:06, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

I'll update it on wiki later today; was hoping to review some other PRs before doing so, but time keeps on ticking, as they say. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 20:20, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

G14

"G6: Unnecessary disambiguation pages" should now be "G14: Unnecessary disambiguation pages" per this discussion; there's now the template {{db-g14}}. Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:43, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

I think I've taken care of all the rest of the on-wiki templates. Will take a crack at this, child willing. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:32, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

 Done ~ Amory (u • t • c) 21:45, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Minor feature update request

The AfD nomination notices for the articles created by new users should be preceded by a Welcome message. Sending AfD nomination without welcoming a new contributor is quite impolite in my opinion. Speedy deletion notices do have this feature. See User talk:Seoryoung. Regards. Hitro talk 10:30, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

@HitroMilanese: That functionality is not provided by Twinkle. It was built in the {{db-notice}} meta-template which in turn was used in creating all other speedy deletion notices. To add it to AfD notice, you may raise the issue at Template talk:Afd notice. –Ammarpad (talk) 11:13, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Templates with wrong names

Can a passing admin/templateeditor fix the |name= parameters of the following templates? Just replace the existing name parameter (within the ambox or mbox) with |name = {{subst:PAGENAME}} or add it if it isn't there. Twinkle's upcoming untag feature relies on these names being correct. These are trivial changes over which it's not worth making 11 TE-protected edit requests.

• Template:Cleanup bare URLs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Template:Cleanup reorganize (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Template:Cleanup tense (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Template:Copy edit (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Template:In use (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Template:Long plot (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Template:Merge (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Template:Merge from (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Template:Merge to (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Template:More citations needed (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Template:Under construction (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thanks, SD0001 (talk) 18:49, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

@SD0001: You can make one edit request here for all the pages. {{Edit template-protected|First page to be edited|Second page to be edited|...}} --Izno (talk) 04:45, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

 Partly done I did the {{ambox}}-based ones. |name= isn't documented at {{mbox}}. — JJMC89 (T·C) 07:13, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

@JJMC89: I have updated the documentations of all the *mbox templates. Of course, they all support the parameter because it's coded into Module:Message box (as you had initially suggested). SD0001 (talk) 09:45, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

 Done I didn't realize it had been added to the module already. — JJMC89 (T·C) 19:48, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Templates for removal

I propose that the following templates be removed from TW. We are often adding more and more stuff into the Tag and Warn modules that they have become overcrowded and it becomes difficult to find the tags that are more likely to be of use. See also https://github.com/azatoth/twinkle/issues/178.

Any more templates for removal? just add a section below

metricate

Template:Metricate (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Just 8 transclusions, all of which are on demo pages, none on an actual article. SD0001 (talk) 12:13, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

GOCEinuse

Template:GOCEinuse (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Redundant to {{in use}}. TW is anyway not created for specialised groups of users. SD0001 (talk) 12:13, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

cleanup tense

Template:Cleanup tense (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Too specialised of an issue. Clearly redundant to {{copyedit}}, and to some extent with {{tone}}. SD0001 (talk) 12:13, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

overlinked

Template:Overlinked (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This is an "issue" that's the easiest to fix. IMO no editor should ever apply this tag. Rather, fix the issue yourself. <100 transclusions. SD0001 (talk) 12:16, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

---

Thank you for bringing this issue, SD0001, I wholly support this. The more we add them the more TW becomes overcrowded and harder to find important templates. Quite a times I see people's request here to add particular rarely used template or one that duplicates another function, it seems people just think any template out there must be included. –Ammarpad (talk) 13:34, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ammarpad: Exactly. I think the reason for that is that a large number of Twinkle users are under the delusion that the only maintenance tags that exist are the ones included in TW. We can't blame them for this, I myself used to think that not too long ago. Specialised tags are often useful, as it's more likely that that there are editors tending to these tags. To make people aware of the fact there exist more tags than the ones in the default set, I guess it would make sense to add a link to Wp:Template messages/Cleanup near the end of the tag list, or in the Custom tags section. SD0001 (talk) 18:18, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Support removing all they aren't needed enough to warrant inclusion. --DannyS712 (talk) 07:16, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

• Support removing all listed templates, to prune the drop-down list and leave it for frequently used templates. Binksternet (talk) 09:51, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
• I'd be inclined to at least keep {{Overlinked}}. It's lack of transclusions may be a victim of the ease with which it is dealt, but it's a reasonable tag that isn't actually always obviously or easily fixed. New and overeager editors often mass-link pages, things get disambiguated, and the page history can get messy. Not in favor of drive-by taggings, but it's not wrong to apply. No thought on the others. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 20:02, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
• Yeah, I'd oppose the removal of overlinked per Amory; it is usually relatively easy to fix but if there are a lot of extra links it can take quite a bit of time; and the person patrolling a page may not have the time to do so but there are a lot of gnomes who are interested in fixing those kinds of things (indeed, that the tag actually gets dealt with might even make it one of the few tags that are actually useful rather than just making an article sit in a maintenance category forever) Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:34, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

  Support the removal of the rest. Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:36, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Warning for inappropriate categorization

I think the Twinkle drop-down menu could use an entry for inappropriate categorization. The warning could mention the WP:CATDEF guideline, urging the user to consider whether a category is a defining characteristic of the topic. Binksternet (talk) 18:12, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Can you elaborate @Binksternet:? --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 20:15, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

We have uw-badcat listed as a single-issue warning, which doesn't seem to be serious enough for repeat offenders. I'd like to see an escalating series of warnings ending in level 4. Binksternet (talk) 01:06, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

This is probably something you should bring up as a proposal on WT:UW. Once multi-level templates are added, we can integrate them into Twinkle. --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 05:22, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Extend Tag module to talk namespace?

I wonder if Twinkle users have any interest in seeing the tag module extended to the article talk namespace, so that common talk page templates like the attribution-related {{Translated page}}, {{Copied}}, {{Merged from}}, {{Merged to}} and {{split article}}, as well as others like {{Article history}}, {{talkheader}}, English variant notices, etc and probably WikiProject notices can be easily placed on talk pages? SD0001 (talk) 09:54, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Request: Adding "Television" to dropdown menu selection for 'Notability' tagging

I already requested this back in March 2017, but can 'Television' please be added to the popup menu selection for 'Notability' tagging an article? – e.g. a {{Notability|Television}} selection?... Both 'Films' and 'Web' (content) are already included, so there's no reason that 'Television' shouldn't be included too. TIA. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:24, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Y Seems reasonable, pull request filed. SD0001 (talk) 20:10, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Sandbox

The documentation still refers to the AfC sandbox, which was deleted (again) and salted in July. A discussion above mentions another sandbox (lowercase 's'), but it's specifically for the AfC Helper script.

I'm not sure how to proceed: should the original sandbox be recreated? Should the other sandbox be modified to say it's both for Twinkle and AFCH and change the link to that? Should there be a sandbox in the draft space specifically for Twinkle instead? I have no idea, I was reading the documentation to see how Twinkle works and saw the sandbox redlink.

Cheers. Isa (talk) 20:29, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

​ Thank you for following this up so carefully. I think it will be fine to simply update the documentation. I was following the existing documentation when I recreated the /Sandbox page for a test in 2017, but it should be fine to also use the AFCH /sandbox for testing Twinkle's article tagging. – Fayenatic London 14:53, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Use Draft:Sandbox. Since WP/WT:AFC pages are no longer used for storing drafts, TW Tag module would soon no longer be supported on those pages. SD0001 (talk) 19:44, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! Isa (talk) 22:11, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Great! That was easy. – Fayenatic London 09:54, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Aren't red links encouraged?

I edited an article a few days ago, introducing a red link which was undone by Twinkle. I thought, as suggested by Wikipedia:Red_link that this was encouraged behaviour. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.17.116.119 (talk) 18:00, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello IP. Twinkle is just a tool, you'll have to take it up with the user that reverted you on their talk page --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 18:03, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

uw-memorialblock

{{uw-memorialblock}} has been nominated for deletion; see discussion. Galobtter (pingó mió) 13:50, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Twinkle not posting RfD nominations on RfD subpage

For some reason, Twinkle is having issues with posting nominations at RfD. At this point, there have been at few instances where Twinkle had issues, specifically on Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 January 8 with one nomination by me and a few by UnitedStatesian. If I recall from.a previous discussion somewhere, my bet is on there being some sort of stray symbol somewhere on that page, but I am not finding it right now. Steel1943 (talk) 18:28, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

• ...Just figured it out. This fixed the problem. Steel1943 (talk) 19:21, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Template:R to English

{{R to English}} has been turned from a redirect into a template proper, at my suggestion (on a different IP). The documentation page says it is included as part of the standard installation of Twinkle (I don't know if that's true, its "parent" {{R from alternative language}} is), so I'm notifying you as requested at the doc. 92.249.211.146 (talk) 11:13, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks — that appears to be leftover from copying the documentation from {{R from alternative language}}. Fixed. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 22:25, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 9 January 2019

Please add a WP:Short description to the preferences page. I suggest the wikidata-supplied The panel to customize Twinkle. --DannyS712 (talk) 05:55, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:33, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Twinkle broken?

I'm simply trying to tag some categories and I get the red message:

"Tagging page: Failed to save edit: Invalid CSRF token."

What is wrong? I powered down and back up, cleared my browser and I still get error messages when I try to tag categories for deletion. I hope this gets solved soon as this is activity I do daily. Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:16, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

@Liz: Can I try? What page, and what tag? --DannyS712 (talk) 06:18, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, DannyS712, but they were just random categories listed on Wikipedia:Database reports/Empty categories(and I tried to tag several different ones). But now, half an hour later, for whatever reason, Twinkle is all of a sudden working again. I don't get it as I have had other problems with it (see post above about tagging for CfD). But, hey, it works now, for whatever reason, so I'm satisfied! Thanks for responding. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:44, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

@Liz: No problem. I'm very interested in user scripts/gadgets and javascript, so feel free to post on my talk page if you have any other random errors / questions. --DannyS712 (talk) 06:58, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

@DannyS712: Perhaps you'd want to contribute to Twinkle? SD0001 (talk) 15:13, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

@SD0001: I'd definitely be interested. How? --DannyS712 (talk) 17:45, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Replied on user talk. SD0001 (talk) 20:16, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Regarding the error, I too have come across this once a while. Reloading the page and reattempting the tag solves the problem. As to why it comes up at all, I guess it's an internal API error, and we should probably tweak morebits.wiki.page to reattempt the edit with a new token whenever this error occurs. SD0001 (talk) 20:16, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Problems with Twinkle & CfD

I nominate categories for CfD using Twinkle and for the last month I've had problems every single time. Twinkle will post a deletion notice on the category page, it will post a notice on the category creator's talk page but it doesn't post an entry on the day's CfD page. There is a box with a red error message that appears, indicating that something went wrong. Can this problem be fixed? It is a laborious process to do this manually if you are nominating multiple categories. Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:38, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

@Liz: The edit history of today's CfD page shows that most of the nominations were done using Twinkle only. Can you tell what is the red error msg saying? Also, are there any errors in your JavaScript console? SD0001 (talk) 11:06, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

You know, SD0001, this all was happening last week and I haven't nominated any categories since then. I'll post again if this happens in the future. I'm glad that someone is checking this talk page as I haven't had much response when I've posted about other problems with automatic editing tools elsewhere on Wikipedia. I'm not familiar with JavaScript console so I will look at this, too. Thanks! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:17, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Proposal of Hello! Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. At least one of your edits, while it may have been in good faith, was difficult to distinguish from vandalism. To help other editors understand the reason for the changes, you can use an edit summary for your contributions. You can also take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. and {{subst:uw-fringe}}

I’ve been told to make a discussion here rather than GitHub. I think Twinkle should have the subtle vandalism and fringe template. The subtle vandalism template would be useful if a user thought an edit may look like vandalism, but it may not be vandalism at all. Notifying the user would make them redo their edit to make it better. The fringe theory template would notify users that their opinion is not helpful in Wikipedia. The NPOV template is too vague to explain that minority opinion is not helpful. -INeedSupport- ^{(Time for Christmas!)} 22:14, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Since this isn't getting consensus here, feel free to gain community consensus elsewhere. --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 14:49, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Function request

Please enable Twinkle to tag redirects in the "User talk:" namespace with {{Db-u2}}. Thanks! Steel1943 (talk) 22:30, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Just went through the last 200 U2 deletions in user talk, which goes back almost 13 months. Of that, about 67 (33.5%) could reasonably be construed as non-rename redirects. That's only five a month, so almost nonexistent by CSD tagging standards, but on the other hand, 1/3 of all U2s is a significant chunk of them. I don't see too many downsides offhand? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 02:17, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

ARV reporting for edit-warring (AN3) seems to be down

The ARV reporting function for edit-warring (AN3) isn't working this morning. After "Submit query", the dialogue box just hangs. I tried it on two different browsers with the same result. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:45, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Worked for me? Other users have had successful reports in the past few days, do you remember what settings you put in? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 12:06, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Please follow the steps at WP:JSERROR and include that information here. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 12:30, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject tags

Could you add the ability to add WikiProject tags to talk pages? it's very common and would be similar to the existing user warn feature. ^{[Username Needed]} 12:35, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Username Needed, use User:Evad37/rater. Galobtter (pingó mió) 12:39, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

There's way too many out there. --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 13:43, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Remove uw-memorialblock

{{Uw-memorialblock}} has been deleted per a Tfd and should be removed from the block dropdown. Thanks! Galobtter (pingó mió) 13:51, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

My PR is already merged but is pending deployment. — JJMC89 (T·C) 19:12, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Ah, thanks! Galobtter (pingó mió) 19:16, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

@Galobtter: I'll try and deploy some of the latest changes tomorrow. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:26, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Issue with Available CSD Criteria

Here is a situation that has annoyed me a couple of times today. I have been trying to move a page to draft space and have accidentally moved it to user space instead, but in the space of a non-existent user. I then move it on to draft space, but there is now a redirect from user space to draft space. (Yes, maybe I should have suppressed redirect creation, but I will describe the problem.) There is now a redirect from the user space of a non-existent user to draft space. My question is why I cannot use Twinkle to request U2, speedy deletion as a non-existent user. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:02, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: What about WP:R2? --DannyS712 (talk) 23:08, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Do you mean R3? R3, an implausible typo, works. R2 is called cross-namespace redirects, but it is only redirects from mainspace to another space. It doesn't apply to redirects from user space to draft space. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:03, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Yeah, thats what I meant. R3 or even g6 --DannyS712 (talk) 00:05, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

User:DannyS712 - In those cases, I have used a combination of R3 and G6. But why won't it offer U2 as one of the options from the user space of a non-existent user? I can work around it. It is just a minor annoyance. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:17, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Robert McClenon I pushed a change for this a few days, I'll try and update the on-wiki config tomorrow. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:37, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Sounds good. Thanks. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:24, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Latest updates — 2019-01-22 (repo at a999149)

I'd like to get in the habit of putting up a notice when (semi-)significant changes go live on-wiki, both to make folks aware of new features/behaviors and to serve as a catching ground should anything not work properly or new bugs crop up. As such, here are some of the more widely relevant latest changes/features:

• xfd: With tfm, notify the creator of the second template (User:Martijn Hoekstra)
• csd: Enable WP:CSD#U2 on userspace redirects (User:Amorymeltzer) and fixed outdated detection of xfd templates (User:SD0001)
• prod: Enable WP:BOOKPROD, fix outdated prod detection, and alert if WP:BLPPROD is used and the page is not in Category:Living people (User:SD0001)
• welcome: Add {{welcomeen}} and {{welcomeen-ro}} (User:ToBeFree)
• batchprotect: Enable extended-confirmed protection (User:MusikAnimal)

~ Amory (u • t • c) 19:00, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Amory, I don't know if this is related to these changes, but when I go to protect an individual page using Twinkle, the protection goes through fine, but it hangs on adding the template. It first happened today. clpo13_(talk) 21:32, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

​Thanks for the report Clpo13, it should be working now! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 22:03, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Yep, it's working as expected. Thanks! clpo13_(talk) 22:10, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Trappist the monk does similar for the citation CS1/2 module updates. You might consider including an actual changes .md file. --Izno (talk) 22:19, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Twinkle duplicating and hanging on AfD nomination

@Amorymeltzer:, both myself and another user had trouble creating an AfD with Twinkle today. It does everything perfectly, except creating the actual AfD page! Twinkle seems to "hang" on this. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hall tree for the other user with this problem. I us eup-to-date Firefox on Windows, if that helps you... Fram (talk) 15:09, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Interesting! Doesn't seem to have happened yesterday at all, and judging from the history page, there are a couple issues. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Golden Grand Prix Ivan Yarygin 2019 – Men's freestyle 70 kg, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Uttam Khobragade, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melbourne Wireless were double nominated; and Golden Grand, Hall tree, and Melbourne (but not Uttam) were not made by Twinkle. @Fram, Triptothecottage, and Jethwarp: did you open up the twinkle xfd menu and click submit twice? That is, did you submit it, see the nomination fail, and then try again? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:24, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, in my case, I tried it twice. The first time I thought it didn't work becaus I first tried "preview" (which didn't work either!), but the second time, without trying preview, I got the same result :-) Fram (talk) 15:33, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Does AfD preview still not work for you? It's fine for me, I wonder if there were issues for the other folks? There's been one successful Twinkle nom since then (Amir Jadidi by Username Needed) so maybe there was a server-side slowdown? Did Twinkle show you a message or just hang as if it were still waiting? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:49, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Looks like it just happened to Doomsdayer520 for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Parker (Marvel Cinematic Universe). ~ Amory (u • t • c) 17:05, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I just had this happen twice while attempting to create an AfD for that article. Both times, the process simply got stuck in the middle. My poor solution was to refresh the browser, which merely resulted in a half-created AfD. There is no rush on my end so I will try again later. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 17:08, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

@Doomsdayer520: Can you open your browser's javascript console and then try again? It'd be a huge help if you could paste any errors you get. ~ Amory (u • t • c)

Sorry to be non-helpful, but I discussed the article in question with another interested editor and we decided to redirect instead. If it matters, I observed the Twinkle pop-up window go through the usual AfD steps but then it got stuck interminably, with the "Submit Query" button grayed-out and inactive. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 17:19, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I tried it twice as well. It just hung after tagging, informing article creator and adding to log. Triptothecottage (talk) 22:11, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

@Fram: The next time you see Twinkle 'hang' for whatever reason on any operation, it's always a good idea to press Ctrl+⇧ Shift+I (see WP:JSERROR if that didn't work) to open the browser console, copy the red stuff that has appeared there and paste it here. Most of the time, we can make out what exactly has gone wrong from that error message. SD0001 (talk) 16:59, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

@SD0001: I see you and I both just did a page successfully, so it's not universal. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 17:30, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Just hung up for me trying to use a request for page protection at 100 Greatest of All Time. I tried a temporary EC and it just sits there with a dialog box that says "Requesting protection of page: Retrieving page". Firefox browser. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:42, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Fyunck(click) Can you try opening the console (see Wikipedia:JSERROR) and then copy-pasting what shows up in there? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 22:51, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Already did it manually and the protection was changed. Won't let me do it again with twinkle. Fyunck(click) (talk) 00:49, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

But it now did the same on another protection request. JS on console says:

• SyntaxError: invalid regular expression flag s[Learn More] load.php:74:553

I hope that helps. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:45, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

@Fram, Triptothecottage, Jethwarp, Doomsdayer520, Fyunck(click), DMacks, Sitush, Girth Summit, and Balkywrest: If it's possible to repeat the AfD or RfPP nomination with the javascript console open, it would be helpful to see any error messages. If you're willing, it'd also be helpful to know your browser type (firefox, chrome, safari, etc.) and version number, operating system (windows, apple), and skin (vector, monobook, etc.). ~ Amory (u • t • c) 23:00, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: No can do unfortunately as I don't have a js console! Was (and am) using Safari on iOS 10.2.1 on an iPad. Triptothecottage (talk) 23:52, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

I had a problem two days ago with RFD. I was also on iPad/Safari. Twinkle updated the redirect, but didn't add the corresponding entry in the RFD discussion file. This happened twice that day and there was no error message, I only found the discussions missing the next day. MB 00:20, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

I have had an unusual spell of nominating but, yes, will do if I nominate another any time soon. I'll give you the full details at the time but I'm mostly using Firefox 64.0 on Ubuntu and my skin is whatever the default was for new users 10 or so years ago because I've never changed it. My RfPP noms seem to have worked ok; it is just the AfD ones. - Sitush (talk) 03:41, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

OK. I have a screencap of the Firefox 64.0 error console under Ubuntu 18.04LTS if you need it. Was for nomination of William Staniforth at AfD. The error line links to this page. - Sitush (talk) 05:36, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

I had the same error on Firefox 64 on Windows 10 in Timeless. --Izno (talk) 05:45, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Sitush, Can you link the screencap? I think I have an idea, but want to be sure since I can't replicate it on my end. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:11, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

I'm using Microsoft Edge on Win10; I'm not familiar with the javascript console, if you still need this and can give instructions I'd be happy to open it next time I do an AfD and send you whatever comes out of it? GirthSummit _(blether) 07:08, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Okay I managed to replicate it myself, and thanks to the info from Sitush, I think I fixed it. It might take a bit to propagate through resourceloader but let me know if there are still issues. Sorry for the hassle all! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:55, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

No idea how a vague page about syntax errors helped you, without me even providing a source code line number but, hey, that's impressive. Just ping me if you get further reports indicating that your fix hasn't worked - I'll do it again. - Sitush (talk) 12:42, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Apologies for the inconvenience caused to you all. It was me who introduced the bug. 2nd time I'm screwing up while editing morebits.js - I should better stay from that I guess. SD0001 (talk) 13:30, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Stuff

...for lack of a better heading.

• The preferences panel at Wikipedia:Twinkle/Preferences nowhere states that twinkle preferences are actually stored on a wiki page, and are hence public (unlike the mediawiki preferences). A js-savvy user could easily understand what they mean (and even a not-so-savvy user could copy-paste someone else's preferences and then go to the twinkle preferences panel). Also, the page doesn't mention that the prefs will be released under the default wikipedia license. (Not sure if there's a copyright/privacy violation in there anywhere, but you might want to look into this.)
• Someone might want to take a look at this commit I did downstream back in 2012. It includes a function to softcode namespace names in regex creation for the unlink tool in morebits.js. Devs may want to properly implement that upstream. The benefit would be that the regex would work on any wikipedia without problem.
• There's a script at hi:User:Siddhartha Ghai/twinkle.js which loads for me a personal version of twinkle from various user subpages. The only difference from the gadget version is that the header and footer have been kept separate. Devs might want to consider separating them again since using this script, changes in one module can be tested easily with the other live modules (i.e copy one module to your userspace, make some changes, use hi:User:Siddhartha Ghai/twinkle.js to load the default gadget, only replacing the changed module with the userspace subpage instead of the mediawiki page) and you can test the changes live!
• Over the past 1.5 months I've done a lot of updates to the gadget at hi.wp (stuff dating from May 2012 to October 2013). I'm just giving a heads up since I may have to take a long wikibreak and if the gadget breaks there, someone might complain here. Anything that was implemented after mid-October hasn't been implemented there (including the mediawiki js deprecations removal)
• Oh, and it seems that Jimbo uses Twinkle too, in case any of the devs ever want to do an April Fool's prank for users in the founder group ;) --Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 16:14, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Wow, even Jimbo Wales uses Twinkle? Man, this is just reason enough to get all autoconfirmed users in good standing to get Twinkle, even if they're not planning on using it often. It's just an awesome tool. --k6ka (talk | contribs) 21:51, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm considering adding a line to the top of the preferences panel saying "Note that your preferences will be released publicly as JavaScript code in a subpage of your user page." Thoughts? Eman235/talk 06:01, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

If you really want to do it, perhaps something less technical would be better: "Note that your preferences are stored in (a subpage of your user page). Only you (and Wikipedia administrators) can modify your preferences, but the settings you choose are visible to everyone." — This, that and the other (talk) 12:10, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

And now the {{-}} is boggling me. If this note is going to be put in I don't think I can do it. Eman235/talk 00:38, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

*slaps self* never mind, figured it out. I made a slight change to the wording mention that it is JavaScript, not blatant text -- dunno what you think of that -- but yes, item one in this list is amended, kind of. Eman235/talk 00:48, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

A hack to allow reversion on mobile

Just want to put this here in case anybody wants it, I have developed a hack which allows a editor to undo an edit while on the mobile interface here. Comments, criticism, bugs, requests welcomed. — fr ⁺ 14:11, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Deletion nominations

Could twinkle tag articles as reviewed whenever they send a page to a deletion nominations (or a discussion nominations for redirects, files, etc)? Any page at a deletion discussion will get plenty review, and there's no need for new page reviewers to look at it separately. This would also apply to speedy delete nominations and prods. Thank you, Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:33, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

@Oiyarbepsy: Per WP:NPPCSD: When tagging pages for speedy deletion do not mark the page as reviewed and When tagging pages for proposed deletion do not mark the page as reviewed. I use twinkle for the asking for new pages to be deleted (when needed), so they shouldn't automatically be marked as patrolled. As for normal AfD/etc, Unlike CSDs and PRODs, you can mark AfDed pages as 'reviewed' after tagging them. Note the "can" and not "should" - marking new pages as reviewed should be based on the content, and asking for the page to be deleted should not automatically assume that the page is good enough to stay in mainspace. Sorry, but I don't think this is a good idea. --DannyS712 (talk) 03:45, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Well, you may not think so, but I always immediately marked as reviewed anytime that I see a deletion nominationdiscussion in progress. The whole point of new page review is that they get reviewed by experienced editors in the Wikipedia community, and any kind of deletion nomination guarantees that this will happen. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:48, 3 February 2019 (UTC) - update, I agree on PRODs and speedys not to tag reviewed, but not on discussions. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:51, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Remove option to list non-articles at WP:PNT

This is about the option in Twinkle for tagging articles as {{Not English}} and its applicability.

WP:Pages needing translation into English (WP:PNT) serves a couple of purposes, one of which is to list articles in a language other than English that have been added to the main article space. These articles are tagged {{Not English}}. That template has an option to indicate that the article has also been listed at WP:PNT and to display a link to that listing.

These articles would, if not for WP:PNT, be immediately subject to deletion requests under WP:PROD or WP:AFD on the grounds of not being in English. WP:PNT only provides them with a two-week grace period, in case someone is interested in translating them and is able to do so.

Pages in Draft space are out-of-scope at WP:PNT, as they aren't in danger of deletion solely for not being in English and they require no grace period. Frequently, however, people list drafts at WP:PNT, so someone has to make the effort to remove the listing and also edit the draft to alter or remove the tag. It isn't a huge nuisance, but it's a nuisance.

To the extent that people are using Twinkle to tag and list these drafts, I wondered whether Twinkle could be tweaked to prevent drafts (or any non-main space page) from being listed at WP:PNT. Right now, when the Not English tag is selected, the option to list the article at WP:PNT is checked by default. For non-main space pages, it would be great if the option were unchecked by default and hidden. Largoplazo (talk) 15:29, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

BLPPROD Issue - Pseudo-Improvement

There has been a recent pseudo-improvement to the BLPPROD tag feature of Twinkle. A pseudo-improvement is something that is meant to be an improvement and is not an improvement. It checks whether the article is in the category Category:Living people. If not, it prompts the reviewer whether they want to continue. BLPPROD is typically applied by New Page Reviewers to new biographies that have not been categorized and are inadequate, as an alternative to A7. I don't think that the addition is an improvement. It makes it harder to use on new cruddy BLPs that are not quite candidates for A7. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:03, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

I don't really understand what you're trying to say here. It's not preventing anyone from tagging with BLPPROD? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 22:11, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Amorymeltzer, I think Robert is saying that that the prompt is annoying because most BLPPRODs are on new pages, which are not categorized yet. Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:26, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

User:Amorymeltzer, User:Galobtter - Yes, correct. Further, in my opinion, which is worth only what you paid for it, the prompt discourages users from using BLPPROD, because it makes them wonder whether it is correct. I went ahead and used it anyway, but I can easily see a new reviewer deciding not to use it. It is possible that they could instead send the cruddy BLP to AFD, which takes more time. I haven't researched the original purpose of BLPPROD, but I have assumed that it was meant to be quick and easy when a quick and easy deletion was in order. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:18, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Wouldn't it make sense to have Twinkle add the living persons category if not already present, instead of balking? (And even add the WikiProject Biography template to the article's talk page with living=yes preset?) Largoplazo (talk) 18:12, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Well on that point, BLP and BLPPROD cover more ground than Category:Living people. I suppose an option could be added, but then you get into tagging, etc., which is not what the prod module is designed to do. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 20:48, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

I understand you now, thanks Galo. I get the extra annoyance, but if a new reviewer is unsure enough of the policy to be dissuaded, wouldn't it be better to confirm? I suppose a more important question is how often BLPPROD is applied. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 20:48, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Talkback

I'd never tried the talkback feature before, and just tried experimenting with it (on my own talk page, to avoid distracting anyone else). I don't know who to thank for the resultant genuine LOL, but someone deserves a good humour barnstar. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 17:51, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Watchlist

How to disable autowatchlist feature when I am reverting edits. --Xain36 (talk) 07:47, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

@Xain36: See "Add pages to watchlist for these types of reversions:" under "Revert and rollback" at WP:Twinkle/Preferences. --DannyS712 (talk) 08:01, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

@DannyS712: Thanks. [10] Xain36 (talk) 08:05, 10 February 2019 (UTC)