Wikipedia talk:Twinkle

"WT:TW" redirects here. For For other uses, see Wikipedia talk:Transwiki log, or the WikiProject Taiwan talk page, see WT:TW (disambiguation).

This page is for general discussion and questions related to Twinkle. It is also one possible venue for reporting bugs and requesting new features; although see Bugs and feature requests below.

Consider also checking Twinkle's documentation, which may answer your question.

Bugs and feature requests

Bugs and feature requests can be reported at https://github.com/azatoth/twinkle (you will need to have a GitHub account). This will probably result in the issue being noticed sooner, as an e-mail is sent to all Twinkle developers. Alternatively, start a new discussion on this page. Possibly slower service, but you will be able to gain consensus, etc., if you need to.

Go to user talk when reverting pending changes

When a page is reverted with the pending changes "Revert changes" button, Twinkle should give a nice link to go to the user's talk page with the page name pre-filled, like it does when "real" rollback is used. Jackmcbarn (talk) 04:35, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

I'll look into this. I only have reviewer rights on testwiki, so I hope our setup is not too different. — This, that and the other (talk) 02:17, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

@Jackmcbarn: Hm, I'm not quite sure what you are referring to here. When I clicked "Reject changes" I seemed to get sent back to the article itself. — This, that and the other (talk) 06:14, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

A link from the confirmation page, I mean. Jackmcbarn (talk) 23:03, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Being hopelessly inexperienced with Pending Changes, I will need step-by-step instructions of every click you are making :) — This, that and the other (talk) 02:52, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Jackmcbarn (talk) 18:31, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

So you want to see a talk page link even before you have made the revert? That seems like a strange order in which to do things. — This, that and the other (talk) 06:41, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes. I know that's kind of strange, but after the revert is made, there's nowhere to put the talk page link. The other alternative is to make the user's talk page pop open in a new window after the revert, the way that it does when you use Twinkle's own rollback to revert someone. Jackmcbarn (talk) 13:27, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

@Jackmcbarn: Sorry Jack, I missed your reply. Yes, a popup wouldn't be a bad idea, although I'm hesitant to add another one. I'll see what is possible here and think about the best way to implement it. — This, that and the other (talk) 07:26, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Threadcromancy, but I would suggest using popups to direct you quickly to their user talk page. You'll have to copy the page name manually, but it's nonetheless faster than clicking and clicking repeatedly. --k6ka (talk | contribs) 22:09, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't want to see the vandal's talk page, but I would like this bot to automatically create a talk page for the vandal, if necessary, and post a notice on the vandal's talk page that they did something offensive. In my recent use of this bot, no notice was posted on the vandal's talk page; apparently because there was no existing talk page for the vandal. - Ac44ck (talk) 19:11, 3 May 2014 (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)

TWINKLE posted unprotection request in wrong section on RFPP

See here. Twinkle posted the unprotection request in the "edit request" section. Steel1943 (talk) 20:13, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

I have to say, this is a strange one. I just tried it myself and it seemed to go into the right section. The structure of the RFPP page doesn't appear to have been altered at any point. I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that the "requests for reduction" section was empty before your request, but was not empty when I made my test request? — This, that and the other (talk) 08:02, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

I also just experienced the same bug with this edit. Both the increase protection and protection reduction sections were empty at the time, so that almost certainly has something to do with it. Sir Sputnik (talk) 05:39, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Not in gadgets anymore

Please update installation as its no longer in gadgets — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rigsofrods (talk • contribs) 23:43, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

@Rigsofrods: You need to be autoconfirmed to use Twinkle, thus it will not appear on your Gadgets tab until you reach the required threshold (4 days and 10 edits; you currently have 5 edits as of the time this is being typed). jcgoble3 (talk) 00:04, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

New tag

Can somebody add {{Histmerge}} to Twinkle, possibly under the merge section of the tags? Thanks! Kharkiv07 (T) 13:32, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Sorry I missed the notification on the top, I've filed a ticket on GitHub. Kharkiv07 (T) 17:53, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

For the benefit of anyone not following the discussion on GitHub, {{histmerge}} is part of the CSD module, under criterion G6. If you would prefer to see it under Tag as well, say so either here or there. jcgoble3 (talk) 05:16, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Marking page as Patrolled or not when using WP:PROD

Hi, Twinkle automatically mark article as patrolled when tagged with CSD while when using WP:PROD (with Twinkle) on any unpatrolled article, the article doesn't automatically gets patrolled. So, should an editor "mark it as patrolled" manually or leave it. What is the standard procedure in these cases ? Thanks Peppy Paneer (talk) 17:00, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

@Peppy Paneer: I think patrolling should be done manually, in that case. Thanks, --Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 19:42, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

@Rubbish computer: Yeah that's what I do. Had a doubt so thought of discussing. Cheers Peppy Paneer (talk) 08:15, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Twinkle not working on a lot of pages

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T114462

Since yesterday (1 October), Twinkle stopped working on a lot of pages on my watch list. An example is Siachen conflict. I don't get a Twinkle tab in the menubar and the rollback/welcome buttons for diffs are gone as well. Is anybody else having such problems? - Kautilya3 (talk) 08:11, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

I've had this problem for a couple of weeks (and other scripts have been failing too, for example Visual File Change on Commons). --Stefan2 (talk) 08:48, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Same here. The problem appears to affect only main/article namespace pages. --Dodi 8238 (talk) 10:33, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

I've mainly observed the problem in the file namespace, but I'm less likely to look for the Twinkle menu in other namespaces. --Stefan2 (talk) 11:12, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

I forgot to mention that I only checked three namespaces: main/article, user, and Wikipedia. --Dodi 8238 (talk) 13:22, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Are you using the Twinkle gadget or importing a script? What's your browser and skin? — Preceding unsigned comment added by NeilN (talk • contribs) 13:09, 2 October 2015‎

I'm using gadget. The same problem appears on both Firefox 41.0 and Chrome 45.0. --Dodi 8238 (talk) 13:22, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

This is a new problem, I noticed it at India and Lal Bahadur Shastri today. I use the gadget, FF 41.0.1, monobook and no settings change in a while. —SpacemanSpiff 13:24, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

When pieces of the UI are missing, does Firefox display a "Waiting for..." message in its status bar? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:32, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

There seems to be a problem with the "Content Translation" beta feature. Go into Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures and turn it off, then see if Twinkle and other scripts come back for you... — This, that and the other (talk) 13:34, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

I turned off the "Content Translation" beta feature and now the problem is gone. Thanks. --Dodi 8238 (talk) 13:38, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Worked for me too, cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 13:39, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Me too. Thanks everybody! - Kautilya3 (talk) 14:25, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• I'm using the gadget. I've never had any beta features switched on. Any idea why Twinkle fails loading when using 'action=view' but not when using 'action=edit'? --Stefan2 (talk) 12:59, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Could you try following the steps at WP:JSERROR and report back here? — This, that and the other (talk) 06:37, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
    • This was solved by commenting out an unneeded line from my global.js script. --Stefan2 (talk) 23:36, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Large D-batch

Earlier today I closed a TfD for a bunch of orphaned, deprecated citation templates and dispatched the list of about 50 with D-batch, as I usually do with big group nominations. Great. Later I closed another TfD for a bunch of orphaned, deprecated citation templates and used D-batch again - absent-mindedly not noticing that the second list had over 800 entries. Then I was surprised to refresh and get a database locked message. Oops! No lasting harm done, but should this function have a (smaller?) maximum list size, or a throttle, or is the best answer "watch what you're doing, you idiot"? Opabinia regalis (talk) 20:06, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

D-batch ought to work with 800 pages. It does them in batches (50 per batch, if I remember correctly). How exactly did the error manifest itself? Did it show up beside every page that you attempted to delete? Did it start off by working correctly, then failed from a given point onwards? — This, that and the other (talk) 04:39, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

I was procrastinating while at work multitasking at the time, so not watching closely, but:

• Partway through, the popup window stopped updating or responding. Not sure where in the list this happened.
• I tried to purge the sandbox page I'd stashed the list on, thinking I'd find where in the list the redlinks stopped, and then got the "database locked" message.
• A few minutes later I tried again and found that everything had been deleted after all.
• I then checked my watchlist and got the "high database lag" message.

So it did work, but not very smoothly, and either caused a transient problem or gave the appearance of it. (FWIW, I'd been around on and off for a couple of hours prior and had seen no database/lag messages beforehand.) Opabinia regalis (talk) 06:03, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Hm, interesting. Well, so long as it worked; that's the main thing. If the WMF operations guys tell us to slow Twinkle down, we'll comply, but until then, WP:PERF applies.

As an aside, do you find that the batch delete and undelete tools meet your needs? I'm always keen to hear feedback from users of the batch tools. — This, that and the other (talk) 08:52, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

It is a little startling to think you're deleting a couple dozen pages and the next thing you see is "oops, you broke the wiki!" :)

But generally batch delete is the best thing since sliced bread. I usually use it for batch TfDs or for deleting templates with a lot of subpages. A couple of ideas would be: 1) the 'reason' field is currently just free text, but having the usual drop-down list might be useful too; 2) when gathering linked pages to put in the checklist, offer a filter by namespace. Opabinia regalis (talk) 18:32, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Spam-warn

Template:Spam-warn has been nominated for merging with Template:Db-spam-notice. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 12:56, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

The link above is incorrect. This is the correct link: Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2015_October_7#Template:Spam-warn. jcgoble3 (talk) 00:25, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

IP user using TW?

An IP user seems to be using Twinkle here. Is this an oddity or something, or did the user just paste in an edit summary? It seems like the latter, given that the IP user reverted the edit before mine, which was made by a registered user, but then claimed to have "reverted 2 edits" by the registered user.

This is just unusual, so I'd simply like to know how the heck that came about. Epic Genius (talk) 03:20, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

@Epicgenius: A Twinkle message was simulated. Given the edit history of the page at the time of the diff you linked to, Twinkle would not have left that exact message at that time. Etamni | ✉ | ✓  05:38, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

@Etamni: Yeah, that was what I suspected. Thanks. Epic Genius (talk) 10:21, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

{{Uw-spamublock}}

I seem only intermittently able to find the useful "promotional username and promotional edits" (Uw-spamublock) blocking alternative in Twinkle. I used it a couple of days ago, but where has it gone now..? Could somebody please tell me the path to it, once I've clicked "Block" and the usual "Block or issue block template" has come up? Bishonen | talk 13:41, 12 October 2015 (UTC).

@Bishonen: You weren't looking at a page in an IP's userspace were you? For registered users you should see the "Promotional username, hard block" option under the "Username violations" heading in the presets dropdown — MusikAnimal ^talk 02:25, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Not in an IP's userspace, certainly. I was amusing myself with the user creation log. The funny thing is, the option you describe is exactly what I have been using, only yesterday it didn't result in spamublock but something different, much shorter. I had to go dig out the spamublock in the old way and paste it in by hand (the horror). Does Twinkle run to glitches like that? Anyway, never mind, now it's doing what I want again, . Thank you, MusikAnimal. Bishonen | talk 15:32, 13 October 2015 (UTC).

No so long as you're in a registered account's userspace you should see those options. Do you recall which user it was in particular? — MusikAnimal ^talk 15:35, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Appropriate use of twinkle

Is it alright to use Twinkle for reverting edits during a good faith content dispute? The reason I ask is because I don't know much about Twinkle and at the beginning of the Twinkle project page is, "Twinkle is a set of JavaScript functions that gives autoconfirmed registered users many extra options to assist them in common Wikipedia maintenance tasks, and to help them deal with acts of vandalism or unconstructive edits." --Bob K31416 (talk) 21:12, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Even before that text, there is a box that says "You take full responsibility for any action you perform using Twinkle. You must understand Wikipedia policies and use this tool within these policies". So if you wouldn't make the revert normally, don't make it using Twinkle.

Twinkle has a good faith reversion option, which specifically mentions that you are reverting in good faith in the edit summary. However, bear in mind that reversion isn't always the best way to resolve a "good faith content dispute". Consider talking it out with the other user(s) - if the faith is good, so to speak, you should hopefully be able to reach an agreement. — This, that and the other (talk) 12:28, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Modification to RPP panel

Could a warning be added to the protection process when selecting for unprotection asking the user to ask the protecting admin first about unprotection? Currently, it means having to ask the requesting user if they asked about it first but having something to explain that (possibly with a link to the talkpage of the admin) before getting that far would be helpful. tutterMouse (talk) 16:48, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

tutterMouse, see User_talk:MusikAnimal/Archive_20#AIV_weirdness. Courtesy pinging @MusikAnimal: --NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:33, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

The fact that protections can be moved and the script would have to backtrack those makes this a little tricky. It of course can be done, but maybe as a first step we can have it say "Please check with protecting admin first (protection log) (move log)" and let the user figure it out? — MusikAnimal ^talk 14:53, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping NeilN, good to know I wasn't the only one considering this. MusikAnimal, the warning is there merely as a front line reminder that RFPP should be the second place you goto, not the first (and definitely not for WP:OTHERPARENT if you got declined by the protecting admin). Letting the user figure it out isn't bad but personally I think having the path of least resistance (in this case, simply telling the user whose protection is the one currently standing and pointing them to their talkpage) would be best but if it's not technically feasible or simply a bigger order than needed then a simple link to the log for the page is good enough. tutterMouse (talk) 17:43, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Twinkle listing invalid speedy criteria.

Hi,

I'm not sure if this is the right place to put this.

Can anyone tell me why Twinkle lists criteria that don't apply to certain namespaces? For example, it lists G1 and G2 when I use it on user pages, but neither criteria applies to user pages. It doesn't list the user page criteria on articles, so I'm wondering why it lets me tag user pages with these invalid (for user pages) criteria?

Thanks

Adam9007 (talk) 23:37, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Tweaking format of AN3 report

Hi, we are discussing changing the format of the reports to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Is there any easy way to modify the output produced by Twinkle? One example: I removed the result from the heading but Twinkle is still including it. Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:36, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

I've posted my thoughts at Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#Changing headings. This should be easy provided we have consensus for the change. My only concern is if other wikis using Twinkle are relying on the current format, or in Twinkle's case, the {{AN3 report}} template. @This, that and the other: thoughts? — MusikAnimal ^talk 15:29, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Reasons for pending protection

Anyone else frequently use "Disruptive editing" or "Adding unsourced content" as reasons for pending protection? If so, can we get them added to the PC preset list? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:29, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Support - Mlpearc (open channel) 14:34, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

 Done Both of these are very common rationale for protection, and the same can certainly be applied to pending changes given it's just less frequent. — MusikAnimal ^talk 15:07, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Anti-vandalism tool

I think the section on appropriate use should be changed, expanded.

Right now, it only has 3 sentences. The first 2 are generic about reverting on WP and not specific to twinkle, so no help as a reference for those interested in Twinkle per se. The latter sentence is specific to twinkle: "Anti-vandalism tools, such as Twinkle, Huggle, and rollback, should not be used to undo good-faith changes, unless an appropriate edit summary is used."

However, it is clearly contradictory, which is why I marked it:

1. twinkle should not be used to undo good-faith changes.
2. twinkle can be used to undo good faith changes with an edit summary.

Since an edit summary should always be used nowadays, twinkle can be used to undo good-faith changes, which contradicts 1)

Does the word "unless" hint at a "rare exception"? Or is Twinkle regularly used to undo good faith changes?

In my editing experience Twinkle is regularly used to undo good faith changes. teher is even a post by Bob K31416 from 14 October 2015 in the section "appropriate use" above. Are there objective data about TW use? Can they be collected by looking at reverts and the choice of vandalism vs other and determining the percentage? that would help.

Conclusion: Twinkle is not an antivandalism tool in the majority of edits in my experience. it is installed by people who like to save time and facilitates reverts of any kind.

Proposal: Twinkle reverts should be restricted to antivandalism, clear-cut function. Otherwise, I feel twinkle shouldnt be "advertised" as antivandalism tool and doesnt deserve the policeman logo. Everyone can revert anything anyway without Twinkle, without the appearance of somehow a "special" authority of a vandalism fighter. how many editors get intimidated by it, not knowing that any autoconfirmed user can install twinkle?

Please note that I do not blame people for installing Twinkle. I have considered installing it myself, but always resisted, because of this dubious setup. I am for this tool, but it needs to be brought back into line with what -I think- was its original purpose. After 8 years of this gadget, a history section would also be helpful. --Wuerzele (talk) 16:02, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

The wording could use some adjusting but Twinkle is clearly not only used for vandalism. Installed you have the following options: [rollback (AGF)] || [rollback] || [rollback (VANDAL)].--TMCk (talk) 16:21, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, --TMCk. re "Tw clearly not only used for vandalism": exactly my point, so why not change the description in the lede/ the page ?--Wuerzele (talk) 18:08, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

The answer to your conundrum is that Twinkle is both an anti-vandalism tool and a more general method to revert changes. The thing is that there are 3 different ways to revert with Twinkle: normal, AGF, and vandalism. Choosing the normal or AGF option in Twinkle will prompt you to provide an edit summary that gets attached to your revert (the AGF option also attaches a specific comment that the edits were in good faith). In contrast, the "vandalism" option does not prompt you for an edit summary; rather, it reverts the edits with only the canned "reverted vandalism by x" edit summary attached. It's this distinction that we're talking about here. Twinkle as a whole can be used to undo good faith changes, precisely because it can allow you to leave a more detailed edit summary. But the anti-vandalism functions of Twinkle must not be used on good faith edits, because they don't allow it. Does that make sense? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:32, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Writ Keeper yes, I see what you are saying by anti-vandalism functions of Twinkle don't allow use on good faith edits.

but do you understand the conundrum how this change of use or mixed use should be reflected in a) its description and b) its logo ? ( i am saying the conundrum, not your conundrum, as you said. i dont think it's personal, but maybe you dont want to own up to the issue.)--Wuerzele (talk) 18:08, 22 October 2015 (UTC)