Wikipedia talk:Twinkle

WT:TW

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.

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48

Other archives

Friendly talk archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Old Bugs page; archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Old RFA page; archive 1, 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 20 days may be automatically archived by .

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

@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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

@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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

~~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)[reply]

*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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Adding new suspected sockpuppets to open investigation

SPI clerk @Vanjagenije: was saying it's incorrect for Twinkle to add a new section to an SPI case for each new suspected sockpuppet, as @Andy Dingley: did here and here. Instead they should go under the same date header, as shown here.

I don't see any documentation on this, but if you go to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations and type in the name of a suspected sockmaster with a case open, it does the same thing as Twinkle, that is, creates a news section that repeats the date of the section header above rather than grouping them under the same header. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:31, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a specific question? Should Twinkle's behaviour be altered? I personally never use the SPI module so can't comment on its suitability for purpose, but I am happy to change it if SPI procedures have evolved over the years. — This, that and the other (talk) 02:45, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I was hoping to ping the SPI clerk @Vanjagenije: so they would come and explain the problem, because they twice asserted that the case additions were wrong, even after I pointed out that this is TW behavior. It appears consistent to me, but maybe Vanjagenije knows something I don't. If not, then there's nothing to see here. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 03:41, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think the point is more than when there is an open case, you should mention/add the new suspected socks to that case and not use Twinkle to file a new one... it'd probably require a lot more work but theoretically Twinkle could probably be tweaked to do that (or maybe just give a warning if there exists an open case). ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 03:45, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanjagenije: I don't really see the problem here. Twinkle is just a tool made to help users. That doesn't mean that the Twinkle is always right. If the case is already open, simply don't use Twininkle, but add new suspects manually. Vanjagenije (talk) 13:29, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, if you go to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations and put in the name of an existing sockmaster, you will get the same behavior as Twinkle. I guess you can try sending a personal message to each and every editor who adds a sock report and hope they all remember to follow this undocumented workaround, but it doesn't sound fun to me. You might find yourself banging your head on something after nagging the 1,000th newbie not to use Twinkle OR the SPI page. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 15:36, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"type" parameter in TFD template broken

I just nominated {{Muchas gracias}} for deletion. I selected the Inline type as its an inline template, however it still used the default template, even though there is "type=inline" in the code. Please fix this. Thanks. --TL22 (talk) 16:00, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The way the TFD tag works is, it appears as a small notice (in this case, the inline notice) in all namespaces other than Template space, where it shows up as the full-blown deletion notice. The reason for this is so that the full TFD notice is seen on the template page itself. Because {{Muchas gracias}} seems to be almost exclusively transcluded from Template space, you are seeing the full notice transcluded around the place. As far as I know there is no way to avoid this. — This, that and the other (talk) 22:55, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

3am sleepy thought: perhaps, instead of checking the namespace, the template should check against the title of the nominated template. This would require that the title of the page be passed in literal form (as opposed to a variable) to the template, but as {{tfd}} is substituted, I would think this could be handled automatically behind the scenes. Am I missing something here? jcgoble3 (talk) 07:23, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

After getting some sleep and reading the template's talk page, I realize that that would still eff up the documentation for the nominated template (plus the title of the template is already passed to the dated template that results from substitution. A better solution would be "noinclude" and "includeonly" tags created with the substitution; the full banner would go in the noinclude tags, while the smaller version would go in the includeonly tags. The |type= parameter would be passed to the version in the includeonly tags. Hmm... jcgoble3 (talk) 18:27, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Add "downgrade to Template Protection" option

Could an option be added to Twinkle allow a "Downgrade to Template Protection" option to be selected and utilized on pages with permanent protection which will place the request on the same location on WP:RFPP as "Unprotection" requests? Steel1943 (talk) 13:18, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Twinkle automatically analyzes the current protection level, if any, and calculates whether to place it in the increase or decrease section. So if you request template protection on a page that is full-protected, it will automatically go in the decrease section. Example: [1] jcgoble3 (talk) 07:29, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting; I just noticed that Twinkle placed this request in the proper section as well. (It is a bit unclear to choose this option since it is not bundled with the "Unblock" option.) However, per the edit in the previous comment and my referenced edit, the only option available to select in Twinkle for the description of this downgrade is "Highly visible template". In my opinion, that is very unclear, especially for administrators who are not WP:RFPP regulars. Could an option be added to place a clearer statement for WP:RFPP administrators ... something such as "Allow template editor editing"? Steel1943 (talk) 12:04, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Direct access to Twinkle utilities?

Is there direct access to any of the Twinkle methods that does Twinkle's work? I often tag users' talk pages with {{uw-autobio}} or {{uw-coi}} tags. I have my own script that automatically adds links to my personal toolbar, and I'd like to add a couple of links that will post these tags with one click without going through the process of opening the Warnings dialog, selecting "Single-issue notices", etc. —Largo Plazo (talk) 16:23, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're probably looking for functions provided by the Warn module. The source is here. All the functions are globally accessible, e.g. Twinkle.warn.callbacks.main. If you are able to decipher how it works you could conceivably use it to warn users without the Twinkle form, instead providing the parameters directly to the relevant functions, but it probably is not as straightforward as you are hoping it be :) — MusikAnimal ^talk 17:21, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll see if I can figure it out but, yeah, callbacks, especially anonymous ones, are a bane to easy reuse. :-P —Largo Plazo (talk) 17:36, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That was some fun exploration. I tried setting up the parameters and executing the callback, and it executed perfectly on the first try—except that instead of adding the autobiography warning to my talk page, despite my having indicated that as the target page in two different places, it added it to the article on Null (which I restored to its previous state seconds later). Hmmmm. —Largo Plazo (talk) 23:54, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. Fixed. —Largo Plazo (talk) 00:00, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

token?

I sometimes get the error message: "Tagging article: Failed to save edit: Invalid token". What token is invalid and is there anything I can do about it? RJFJR (talk) 22:07, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism rollback not warning editors

Today when I use Twinkle to rollback vandalism, it pops up a window to edit the editor's talkpage but doesn't actually add anything to it. I thought it used to automatically add a warning? I haven't used this feature for a month or so, so I can't really say when it started. GoldenRing (talk) 08:31, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@GoldenRing: No, Twinkle opens the editor's talkpage for you but then it is up to you to choose what message to add there. Twinkle's "Warn" dialog makes this fairly easy. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:47, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. My mis-remembering. Thanks. GoldenRing (talk) 08:54, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Welcome-t redirected

I have redirected {{Welcome-t}} to {{Welcome}}, because the latter now includes a link to the Teahouse Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:03, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Andy. I note that Twinkle has never offered the option to welcome users using {{welcome-t}}; the presence of the Twinkle template on the template's documentation was in error. Nonetheless, thank you for notifying us; if Twinkle had indeed offered {{welcome-t}} alongside {{welcome}}, we would have needed to remove the former template from Twinkle. When I have a spare few hours, I will do an audit of all templates with the {{Twinkle standard installation}} template on them, to confirm that they are indeed used by Twinkle. — This, that and the other (talk) 12:05, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can't find twinkle in my gadgets page

Hi, I'm trying to install twinkle on my account, but cannot find it in my gadgets section. Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks, Bluestar337 (talk) 10:18, 10 September 2015 (UTC)Bluestar337[reply]

@Bluestar337: It should appear once your account is autoconfirmed; that is, once you've made ten edits with the account and been registered for four days. -- John of Reading (talk) 10:35, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

New template addition

Hi, can Template:Uw-paid1, Template:Uw-paid2, Template:Uw-paid3, and Template:Uw-paid4 be added to Twinkle. These were recently created due to the Orangemoody case and are definetly handy. Thanks Tortle (talk) 23:10, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]