Wikipedia talk:Twinkle/Archive 17

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

I know this may seem like a dumb/repetitive question, but I've spent the last 4 hours editing my monobook.js page, attempting to configure TW's settings so that I do not leave the shared IP notice on user talk pages. I also do not want pages which I revert to be added to my watchlist, or user talk pages that I warn. I have read the documentation for TW at least a dozen times, edited my monobook.js page repeatedly, copied the code from other user's pages, searched through these archives, yet nothing is working or helping. I've attempted enabling TW from within the Gadgets section and simply having the config code on my monobook.js, I've tried to enable TW strictly using my monobook.js, etc. I honestly am at a loss for what I am doing wrong or what I need to do in order to fix it. I've repeatedly cleared my browser's cache too. I just cannot figure out what code needs to be on my monobook.js page in order for TW to work the way that I want it to. Can anyone point me in the right direction or give me any advice? Nubzor (talk) 08:55, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

As far as the watchlist issue, go to "my preferences" under the "watchlist tab", and uncheck the box that says "add pages I edit to my watchlist". That should do it. I'd like to know how to not leave the "shared IP" notice as well, if it's possible. --Susan118 (talk) 16:15, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

This is so frustrating because I know that it's possible. I've found users who have used TW on anonymous users and there is no shared IP notice. I then looked at their monobook.js page and copied their code directly, but still nothing will remove this thing. Nubzor (talk) 18:06, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm just curious, why do you want to remove the shared ip notice?

talk

) 19:06, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I removed it because I don't think it's particularly useful.

Nubzor, are you

clearing your cache after you update your monobook? FYI Susan's suggestion re: preferences will interfere with your regular editing if you like pages you actually edit to be added to your watchlist automatically, so I'd use the config option in this case. Are you using a skin other than monobook, perhaps? –xeno ^talk

19:08, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Clearing cache multiple times, and am using monobook. I would like to remove it because it gets rather repetitive and bulky after someone else has already included it. It honestly isn't that big of a deal, but it's to the point now where I just want to figure it out because I can't seem to solve it. I also don't like that every page I revert or user I warn is added to my watch list. Thank you Susan for the tip, but the (default) settings within my preferences are already disabled. Would anyone be able to link me their exact code that is confirmed working? Also, do you have TW enabled through plugins and then just the config code in monobook.js? Or do you enable the entire plugin through the script? Nubzor (talk) 19:23, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

You can take a look at my monobook, it seems to work fine. Note I'm importing Twinkle modules seperately. –xeno ^talk 19:48, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have realized it would not be such an obvious solution. I didn't realize Twinkle would override your Wikipedia settings (although I should have because other programs/tools can, now that I think of it). I guess I really don't know enough about it that I should be commenting. :)--Susan118 (talk) 20:08, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Susan - on the contrary, thank you for trying to help! I obviously don't know what I'm doing either, or I wouldn't be having these problems! Xeno - Thanks a lot. I'm at work now but will try and toy around with it later tonight. I'm bound and determined to figure it out. Just curious, which browser are you using? Nubzor (talk) 22:38, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Solved: So...I feel rather retarded. Turns out that it was my browser. I mainly use Google's Chrome, but I loaded wiki in Firefox and it now works just fine. Sigh...And to think that I got 3 hours of sleep last night because I was refusing to go to bed until I solved it! What a waste. But a general FYI, always recommend Firefox over everything! :D Nubzor (talk) 03:27, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, that makes sense then. A bit of my fault, I was going to ask if you were using IE perhaps but then I realized that Twinkle wouldn't have worked at all. So it works somewhat in Chrome? I'll keep that in mind. (I tried Chrome but realizing very few of my scripts work, quickly ran in the other direction back to my beloved fox). –xeno ^talk 13:49, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

When you use Chrome, consider using my twinkle loader User:TheDJ/twinkle.js. This is a problem with Twinkle that cannot use browsers that do parallel download/parse/execute of Javascript. It assumes Firefox's behaviour of download/parse everything and execute only after everything is done downloading/parsing. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 14:23, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Also, Nubzor, I've just tweaked your monobook somewhat which might help as well.
DJ, if Twinkle generally works in Chrome, but just ignores some configuration values (at least that's how it appears), how would delayed loading help there?
Not watchlisting pages that Twinkle edits is currently not possible if you have "always watch" turned on in your preferences (see WT:Twinkle/Archive 16#Twinkle Configuration prob). Amalthea 14:59, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone for all the help. That was one question that I did have Amalthea. Most user's monobooks that I looked at, did not at all resemble the example config file listed within TW/Documentation. Instead of using =, they used :, among other differences. I honestly know nothing about java/scripting so maybe it can work either way, but that was something that I had questioned. Nubzor (talk) 17:36, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

This is a small but irritating issue. I added a little notice on someone's talk page recently about a minor edit. Twinkle added the notice fine, but didn't create a new level-2 header. This probably caused him to be a little more irritable than he otherwise would have been.

Would you mind checking out the issue?

Thanks! — Ken g6 (talk) 19:29, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

So, recent events have forced me to disable my popup blocker, which was previously blocking the Twinkle popups for opening the talk page on a revert. Is there any to disable this feature? Changing 'window' and 'blank' to 'tab' (with the TwinkleConfig.userTalkPageMode function) does nothing. —LedgendGamer 03:34, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't use TW all the time but have started using it more lately. I could swear I used to get the 3 rollback options on page history, watchlist, and contributions pages, but now I only see them on the diffs. I went and changed the rollback line in my monobook.css to : TwinkleConfig.showRollbackLinks = [ 'diff', 'others', 'mine', 'contribs.']

...but that didn't change anything. What am I missing? --Susan118 ^talk 05:12, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

I should have mentioned that I installed the whole thing from the Preference page, and did not do the individual installation. --Susan118 ^talk 05:13, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

OK...now I see them in other people's contribs as well, but that's it.--Susan118 ^talk 05:38, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

It's supposed to be in your monobook.js (see

Troubleshooting). I've moved it for you, and removed all options that were unchanged. Should work for you now. Amalthea

08:38, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Geesh I had the whole thing in the wrong place? Not too bright of me. Thanks so much for fixing it. :)

Now I can see the TW rollback links in the contribs (mine and others) pages. Am I wrong in thinking they are supposed to also appear on the watchlist and page histories (i.e. anywhere a regular rollback link would appear) as well?--Susan118 ^talk 15:24, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

This is probably really a stupid question, but here goes. How do I make Twinkle not add pages it tags to my watchlist? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 18:22, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

TPH, tags? Do you mean

is called watchTaggedPages. tedder (talk

) 18:28, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm talking about pages that I tag for deletion via Twinkle. But yeah, Friendly does it too. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ⁽Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 22:40, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Do you have "Add pages I edit to my watchlist" ticked in your preferences?
If so, then that setting takes precedence over Twinkle and Friendlies settings. Which is stupid, and should be changed.
If not, then check

Friendly, they have options to control what's added to your watchlist and what isn't.
Amalthea

23:03, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

TenPoundHammer, you can add the following to your monobook.js:

FriendlyConfig.watchTaggedPages		=	false;

That should keep pages with maintenance tags from being watchlisted. That should override the default setting in Twinkle/Friendly. I do the same thing to keep pages I tag from being marked as minor edits. MuZemike 16:39, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Resolved

When I just tried to revert a couple edits the program wouldn't let me input an edit summary and instead a box came up with "XML Parsing Error: no element found Location: chrome://global/content/commonDialog.xul Line Number 1, Column 1:". I have no clue what this means but thought I'd drope a note here for help from people who can program twinkle. ThemFromSpace 01:13, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Nevermind; this seems to have cleared itself up. Perhaps my browser farted up for a bit. ThemFromSpace 23:22, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Resolved

Please see this – [rollback] links no longer appear on contribs-pages. ╟─TreasuryTag►ballotbox─╢ 12:13, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

• Y Fixed, thanks. Amalthea 15:07, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Resolved

Whenever I'm on someones controbutions, like a new user's, and I use the Twinkle button that says "Rollback" and "Rollback (VAN), it takes me to this weird thing that's something like [[1]] --Abce2|AccessDenied 15:59, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, OK. It's really Y fixed now. I was happy when the links were back in the section above, but didn't test it. As always, you'll need to

refresh your browser cache to get the updated script. Amalthea

16:25, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Rollback links don't perform rollback.

Resolved

I am using Twinkle and Opera 9.64. When I click on the diff. page Rollback links, Twinkle starts its rollback process, but doesn't seem to perform the rollback. It gets stuck at this screen: [2]. Checking the article history reveals that no rollback has happened.

This worked before the recent update. I made sure to logout, clear my cache, and try again after noticing the problem, but that didn't solve it for me.

I am using Friendly at the same time. I use the secure server.—C45207 | Talk 15:15, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Same symptoms on Firefox 3.0.11 and Google Chrome (2.0.172.31) as per today, also on the secure server, haven't tested on the unsecure one. MLauba (talk) 23:54, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

After some more testing, I've found that is works in Safari 4 and Opera 9.64 on the non-secure server. Neither works with the secure server.—C45207 | Talk 00:04, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Apparently the API on the secure server doesn't work anymore, or works differently. I'll look into it. NAVPOP won't work for you anymore either, or at least the Gadget version won't. If you include the wrapper from Lupin's subpage it will break encryption and use the unsecure API. Amalthea 09:41, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid this will stay broken until bugzilla:13049 is fixed. Amalthea 10:53, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

 Fixed. Or workarounded at least. Amalthea 17:07, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I usually use 30 days for

Hello. Is it possible (or could it be made possible) for one to create custom warning templates, eg. User:TreasuryTag/vand-final, and have add them to one's personal Twinkle, in the relevant sections? Thanks. ╟─TreasuryTag►hemicycle─╢ 16:37, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure it's technically possible, since there is the option for custom welcome templates in Friendly. Also, I don't know if you realized it, but your example link is red. SchuminWeb (Talk) 17:32, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I did, it was just an example :) ╟─TreasuryTag►quaestor─╢ 18:49, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Recently, I tried to tag

I think the correct TW behavior in this case should be to abort as it does when there is already a speedy tag on the page. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 19:35, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I think a warning would be the right thing, but not an unconditional abort. Sometimes a CSD tag was improperly removed by the page's creator, and it needs to be retagged. On the other hand, I'd like to know if there was a previous CSD so that I can either watch the page closely to make sure the creator doesn't remove it, and also, I dont' want to retag previously declined speedies. Gigs (talk) 02:50, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Right, there are a number of reasons where a second speedy warning is appropriate, possibly even if it's the same warning from the same editor a short time later, i.e. a recreation of an already deleted attack page.
What should instead be changed is that Twinkle holds back with the notification until it is sure that the tagging went through. Bugs concerning that (one specifically about the spam blacklist) are already listed above. Amalthea 23:54, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Is there any way to make Twinkle not warn an article's creator if the creator is an IP? Every time I AFD an article that was created by an IP, it turns out that said IP hasn't edited since 2005ish. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 19:08, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

How often does that happen to you? I'm unsure when anons could last create (non-talk) pages, but that probably was back in 2005. They still can create talk pages, and tagging one of those should probably still notify them.
Is this really enough of a nuisance to warrant some additional logic? Amalthea 10:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, because every time I've had to warn an IP of a deletion discussion, it's been an IP that hasn't edited since 2005ish. I haven't found a single article created by an IP that edited after that point. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 20:16, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Here are some random examples from the last month of pages created by IPs:

Induction plasma technology, Nancy Donahue, Magic: History, Theory and Practice. And there are a number of static IPs who regulary create articles, even have userpages, and will want to be notified of deletion discussions. The logic would need to be much more complex, like checking when the article was created, and e.g. if it was created more than three years ago and the IP hasn't edited in the last year, we don't need to bother notifying..
I normally wouldn't consider it since it won't make much of a difference, and the excess talk pages don't hurt anyone, but deletions of such completely useless talk pages have I think stopped after some recent outcries, so not creating them in the first place makes more sense. But I'm unsure about the logic. Amalthea

09:51, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

What are opinions here about changing Twinkle that way, so that it doesn't notify creators of SD and AfD noms if the creator hasn't edited in, say, 6 months? Amalthea 10:21, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Seems like a sound idea. If the user has not made any contributions in at least six months, they are probably on an extended wikibreak or have left the project. Thus it's pretty likely that they will not see it or act on it in the relatively short timeframe of a deletion discussion, so why bother, especially since it's not a requirement to notify anyone other than transcluding the discussion on AFD. SchuminWeb (Talk) 00:20, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Used to, when I was looking at a diff (or prev as it's called now), I had all kinds of links.. Rollback good faith, etc. Now I have none, zero. I did a refresh. Nothing. - ALLST✰R▼^echo _{wuz here} 14:55, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, it's working again. Thanks to whomever for doing whatever. - ALLST✰R▼^echo _{wuz here} 03:18, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Dear, I am from Bengali wikipedia. I need this for there. I copy all script at my namespane in Bengali wikipedia.[3] and their sub script. But still not found any tab. If there needs to change any script please advice me. - Jayanta Nath ^{(Talk|Contrb)} 06:08, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

WP:TW/DOC#Trouble, and if that doesn't help you should ask bn:User:Joy over there for support, he'll know more about potential problems there. Amalthea

09:40, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks and sorry. Now the tab is shown. bn:User:Joy is mine. And Now I am facing new issue. I post here Wikipedia_talk:Twinkle/Bugs#TW-B-297.And another is no action happend in csd,prod,xfd. Although all templates have been create in Bengali wiki with the same eng template name.- Jayanta Nath ^{(Talk|Contrb)} 10:43, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

We are still facing problem with Twinkle. Are there need any chenge to mediawiki pages? please advice me. I am waiting for your response.- Jayanta Nath ^{(Talk|Contrb)} 20:23, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

The first thing you need to do is make sure that your pages are valid XHTML. For example, when I try to edit my talk page there, the w3c validator lists a lot of problems. The first (relevant one) it notices is an unclosed span tag in bn:MediaWiki:Edittools which needs to be fixed.
Amalthea 22:22, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you Amalthea for your initiative for our wikipedia.As early as possible I should fix that issue and inform you.- Jayanta Nath ^{(Talk|Contrb)} 03:05, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

When I leave a warning on a talkpage or perform a vandalism rollback, it adds the page to my watchlist even though I have that set to False in the monobook file. This seems to have started recently, possibly with the Safari upgrade (I am using Safari 4.01). I haven't reported this as a bug because I wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something obvious first. --Loonymonkey (talk) 19:03, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Do you have "Add pages I edit to my watchlist" activated in your preferences? Amalthea 19:34, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

No, I checked that. I'm pretty sure it's Twinkle because it doesn't do it if I just leave a comment manually. --Loonymonkey (talk) 18:22, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I tried to CSD two articles a few minutes ago but I wasn't able because Twinkle said my account was too new. I've had this account since October 2008, so I don't understand how my account is too new. Also, I used Twinkle several times today so I don't understand what happened. Is anyone else having this problem? Now Twinkle has completely disappeared from my monobook and when I try to re-add the code it won't work.

It's not working for me, either. Ray^Talk 22:50, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

And here I thought it was only me. Maybe it's a bug?

(Talk|Contributions)

22:51, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I just created a test page, tagged it for speedy deletion and then deleted said page with Twinkle. So it's just picking on you. ;-) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:55, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

The tags are not showing up for me as well. Something is definitely up, I do not think TW and Friendly are picking on us... -MBK₀₀₄ 22:56, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Try bypassing your cache and maybe it will stop working for you. Ray astutely pointed out Animum recently made some changes to Twinkle's framework, this is probably why it stopped working. –xeno^talk 22:57, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Tabs have all just vanished for me. :-(  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:57, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Ditto -- I've been on WP for about 5 years or so (plus I've been using Twinkle for awhile now), so I'm pretty sure I'm nowhere near being "too new." Sounds like there may be a bug of sorts floating around.... --mhking (talk) 23:11, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

• Animum reverted, should work again now. Bypass your cache. –xeno^talk 23:16, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, Twinkle is working again. Thanks xeno!

(Talk|Contributions)

23:23, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Twinkle has ceased the functions of Twinkle in my (and others) browser. There's a bug in the JavaScript (per Werdna at #wikimedia-tech). Thanks. ^blurred_peace ☮ 23:06, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Redux

Did Animum try this again? Twinkle has stopped working for me once again (Admin, Monobook installation, multiple cache refereshes), and the tabs don't show up on new pages I open. -MBK₀₀₄ 21:54, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

It's working for me. I just used it to CSD a page and when I click on the diff the tabs show.

(Talk|Contributions)

22:01, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Always report browser and version when you report problems with Javascripts please.. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 22:04, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

It suddenly stopped working for me, too this afternoon. Firefox 3.0.11, Windows XP Pro. Did a refresh, no change.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:07, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I've now also completely quit out of FF and relaunched the program, with no change. It broke for me sometime between 20:50 and 21:58--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:13, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

My apologies, Firefox 3.0.11 on Windows XP Media Center Edition, and the tabs still don't show up even on diffs or article pages. -MBK₀₀₄ 22:08, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Should be fixed, please

refresh your cache once more. Was a problem with the way your friendly configuration was set up. Amalthea

22:16, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't explain my problem, but mine doesn't seem to be TW related. Nothing in my monobook is working, even if I take Twinkle/friendly out altogether. <sigh> --Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:22, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Try refreshing your cache, DJ fixed it. Amalthea 22:24, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I can see the tabs again, so thanks, but the question still stands since that install config has worked for me for years... (What changed?) -MBK₀₀₄ 22:25, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

An error was made in MediaWiki:Common.js, which runs site-wide for everyone, that was stopping it from working. The broken content has been reverted. So it now works - nothing to do with Twinkle or your config at all :). Ale_Jrb^talk 22:41, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

(ec) It's probable it wasn't that after all, but the same issue Fabrictramp had (see

WP:VPT#Monobook.js not working?). When I tried your monobook.js on I got some errors in my javascript console about undefined configuration variables, and fixing them gave me back my tabs despite Common.js still being broken at that point.
In any case, with the old way to configure Twinkle and Friendly problems like that could always occur (see archive), and depend on your browser, browser cache, and race conditions. Amalthea

22:46, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

A browser refresh and I'm seeing tabs again too. Whew! :)--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:52, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Please don't test Twinkle to see if it works on live pages. We have a sandbox for such things. SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:57, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Has anyone thought of something like this? • S • C • A • R • C • E • 14:49, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

What are you getting at? If you're suggesting adding it to Twinkle, then I'd disagree, because Twinkle is all-business when it comes to warnings, and this is less business-y than a typical warning that Twinkle carries. SchuminWeb (Talk) 15:12, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

What if, instead of having a big list of usernames cluttering up the morebits.js file, we place a code that disables Twinkle on the user's monobook and protect it? Triplestop x3 00:45, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

There are currently four people on the blacklist. Additionally, I don't know of a way to protect only one part of a page. Can that be done? We don't want to lock someone out of editing the rest of their monobook.js file.—C45207 | Talk 05:11, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Plus, some users do not use the monobook and instead use twinkle through the gadgets tab in their user preferences. The blacklist, as it currently stands works when the user utilizes Twinkle through this method. Before the blacklist, abuse of Twinkle by a user which had it enabled through their preferences, meant that the only way to stop the abuse would be a block. -MBK₀₀₄ 05:18, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I really like the way Twinkle now automatically adds a welcome message when creating a user talk page with a csd notice, and I wondered if it couldn't just do that whenever it creates a new user talk page. I usually manually add one myself, but it would be a nice "step saver."

Eh... I don't particularly want a warning diluted by a welcome message. Seriously, there are times when I've given IP users an "only warning" to open their talk page, and I don't want to say, "Welcome to Wikipedia. This is the only warning that you will receive for your disruptive edits." SchuminWeb (Talk) 00:14, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

• The same thing was brought up when I suggested that Huggle be able to do this. My thought was that maybe it could be a box like the "notify if possible" box that you could uncheck if you thought it was not appropriate, or maybe limit it in some other way so that it doesn't do it for anything stronger than a level 2 warning...
  talk
  ) 21:39, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

It would certainly be good if it would welcome before giving a CSD notice for an image. I hate warning without welcoming- I now slow my patrolling down by manually welcoming users before automatically notifying them of deletion. J Milburn (talk) 21:26, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

The {{

firstarticle}} welcome notices are a feature of the notification templates, so they can just be added to them. That's probably uncontroversial since CSD, PROD and AFD all leave those warnings (not sure about MFD, FFD, RFD, TFD, CFD). Amalthea

17:20, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Can you think of an edit summary that works with all of no source, no license, no permission, no fair use rationale, disputed fair use rationale, orphaned fair use, replaceable fair use? If not I'll need summaries for all of them. Amalthea 17:17, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Since many Wikipedians are using

I use Google Chrome 2.0.172.37 and Twinkle sometimes doe's not work. Powergate92Talk 19:07, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I need so much help with my Twinkle. What's the code I need?

Your monobook.js looks good, assuming that you are using the default monobook skin.
I suggest you first go over

WP:TW/DOC#Trouble. Amalthea

06:23, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I know.
Is it claiming that it finished the other steps, in the feedback that it gives? Amalthea 16:33, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Sometimes. It's happened about three times now.

talk

) 18:27, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Did something get done? Just did another nom and it was smooth sailing, all steps completed.

talk

) 18:51, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Spoke to soon, just did another one, and it said it informed the creator and added it to today's list, and it didn't. This reminds of when a car has an intermittent problem that it just won't do while the mechanic is around...

talk

) 01:13, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I can no longer use rollback or xfd on Firefox for windows after its latest update. It may be something to do with pop-ups, but I don't even get a pop-up blocked notice (suggesting some kind of blacklisting?). I have enabled popups for en.wikipedia.org - is there another site I need to enable them for?

It all works fine for me still on firefox for Mac and Opera.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 08:36, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

• I think at this point, it's probably best to just go back to Firefox 3.0.x for now. I upgraded my PC to Firefox 3.5 for Windows, and it broke a lot of different things, and didn't have the save-your-tabs feature, so I just went back to the old version, and all was well. I use Firefox 3.5 for Mac with Twinkle, Friendly, etc. with no problems, but the Windows version seems to have issues. SchuminWeb (Talk) 20:33, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
• I'm not aware of any problems with FF 3.5 on Windows. What exactly isn't working? "Can no longer use" isn't particularly helpful. Are you still having the links, or are they gone completely? Are there any messages in your javascript console regarding Twinkle? Amalthea 20:46, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

It seems to have a problem with any function that tries to open up a usertalk page or other discussion page as part of the process. For example, a rollback window comes up reporting on the progress of the rollback, and it gets stuck on the line "opening user page..." (or whatever the phrase is) Nothing is actually done either to the article page or to the use page.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 23:49, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Over at CSD some people were concerned that Twinkle users often neglected to notice large numbers of warning templates already on a user page. Perhaps twinkle could display a list of warnings currently on the user page while the user adds a warning?    M   23:45, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

There is already the full talk page (nothing hinders people from reading the talk page) _→AzaToth 01:01, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes but Twinkle makes it so that warnings can be added without ever visiting a user's talk page, and many, many people apparently don't bother to visit, given the vast increase in lack of tailoring in warnings in the wake of the explosion in use of automated tools. I wrote the post below earlier today and I think it explains why the fact that people can visit the talk page doesn't address the issue.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:25, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

There is no doubt that Twinkle has added greatly to our ability to catch vandals, quickly warn users, tag pages and so on but its automation has had some unintended side effects. When we were patrolling newpages before Twinkle and Huggle and so on, we were forced to visit the talk page and manually type out our warnings (well, copy and paste them) but the process resulted in us really seeing what was on that page and when we did that, we were much more likely to see what was going on with that particular user, and concomitantly tailor our reaction and to follow up appropriately.

Today it's far more common than it used to be that a user may receive many first level warnings for some activity without anyone realizing the user is just continuing on with the same bad activities. With twinkle we warn without even visiting the talk page. So often, no one connects the dots and starts issuing tailored warnings or starts an escalating series, such as foregoing another nonsense warning, but instead issuing {{

test3article}}) (click here)

This is of course just a rudimentary thought of the way it could work, but we really would be well served by having Twinkle recognize what's already on a talk page and alert the tagging user, since in a sense, Twinkle, for all its benefits (and they are many), is also creating a problem by allowing warnings to be placed with such ease that no one need even visit the page tagged. It is human nature that a large portion of those people who are no longer forced to visit the talk page, will not.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk

) 03:25, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I think it's a very good idea, as practice can seep into policy. For example: as a relatively new user of Twinkle, I am also now a more regular warner. As a result I often see a lot of pages, particularly IP pages, with several level 1 warnings, especially when each warning is spaced out over more than a month. To be honest, I haven't been sure if this was because it was an IP user (and so we presume it might be several people using it, and so escalating warnings are less appropriate), or because people were just throwing warnings out.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 04:18, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

• I agree this is a problem, but it's a problem with users not with Twinkle itself. Feels like blaming the hammer when the wall is crooked. Perhaps a simpler solution would be to add something to the main Twinkle page to remind users of the tool that they should check to see if there is a pattern of disruptive editing.
  talk
  ) 19:00, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Of course it's a problem with users. No one is blaming Twinkle but it's an inevitable side result of the automation that cannot and will not be fixed by a notice on the talk page. That's as unrealistic and would be as ineffective as the Vogons posting the public notice scheduling the demolishment of the Earth in a basement with no stairs and no light behind a door with a sign on it that said, "Beware of the leopard." I crafted that analogy especially for you, Zaphod.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:52, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
  • If we sum up the good and bad Twinkle has done, it comes out on top my a mile. But its efficiency does encourage a certain fast pace, and where it excels in most areas, it does seem inefficient on this important step of checking the user's page. It would be great to have this.    M   19:42, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
• Twinkle does preview the user talk page before you select the warning template to place, and it will warn you if someone else has placed a template in the very recent past. IMHO, Sometimes less automation is better. --Versageek 19:55, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Resolved

It isn't working I enabled it for my gadgets and my monobook thing and it ain't doing a thing I have Java enabled what do I do? JJ1664 (talk) 03:57, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

WP:AUTOCONFIRMED to use Twinkle. Amalthea

06:39, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Ditto - switched back from beta after about 30 seconds because of lack of gadgets and twinkle. Will try the beta again when I am in create/edit mode - but it's no good without twinkle for vandal fighting.    7   ^{talk | Δ |}   03:57, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Works just fine here. Safari 4 most likely just ONE of your scripts wasn't working, blocking execution of the others. It's important to figure out which one. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 09:58, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

And please don't forget that vector.js is by default empty compared to your current monobook.js —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 10:09, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

It didn't work for me, with this in my vector.js page and the compatibility gadget enabled, in Firefox 3.5 on Vista. Dendodge _T\^C 16:43, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

But have you seen your own monobook.js ??? There are so many scripts there, it is very likely, that at least 1 is broken. And that can then take the execution of all the others with it. In the Tools menu of your Firefox, there is the "Error Console". This should show you which scripts are failing at which points. Best copy and paste that somewhere, I won't mind helping out fixing the scripts. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 19:56, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Just moved across to the beta and added Twinkle to my vector.js file. First look - it appears to work OK. Have to get used to the Twinkle options being in the dropdown menu, but aside from that, can't see any problems so far. ~~ [ジャム]^[t - c] 10:30, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

How Twinkle will be integrated exactly into the new skin, can probably be debated. Perhaps a "Twinkle" menu is desirable to separate them from the other actions. If anyone has any good ideas about that, please state them. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 13:53, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I certainly feel that a separate Twinkle dropdown would be desirable (though I have no idea how possible). Right now, my dropdown box is cluttered with my admin tools, twinkle tools, and other stuff. I suppose this is exactly how things were before Vector ( :P ), but now that we (perhaps?) have the option for dropdown menus, I definitely think it would be a step in the right direction for Twinkle. _TalkIslander 16:28, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

• Could we dial this back for a sec for the technically ignorant? What's all this about "vector"? Should I copy Twinkle to my own vector page, assuming I have and/or need one? Does it make any difference that I am using Safari 4.0.2 and not Firefox? Pretty sure Twinkle is the only thing in my monobook, nothing else ever seemed to work out to well for me.
  talk
  ) 17:26, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

WP:TWINKLE for the instructions, but subst monobook for vector). ~~ [ジャム]^[t - c

] 18:14, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

• Is there any further progress or updates on beta functionality? Is someone actively working on a "twinkle" menu or any other things? --Pennstatephil (talk) 19:18, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
  • What other things?
    Not me, anyway. I might find time a couple weeks from now, but honestly, I don't particularly feel like it without proper support from the skinbuilders. Adding code into every user script to support placing new dropdown menus, or even into the site script of every project, is highly stupid – a skinning system that deserves its name should take care of that itself, by providing a uniform way that works with all skins. The absence of a response at bugzilla:19531 makes me believe they don't particularly care about that though. Amalthea 20:01, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

How do I disable the "watch page after warning/reverting/tagging" function in Twinkle? I tried replacing all the "watchpage" results with "false" in my monobook, but now none of the Twinkle functions are appearing. Am I just putting down the wrong word, or can the watch function be disabled at all? Thanks, Cureden 16:43, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Do you have "watch all pages I edit" enabled in your preferences? If so, there's currently no way to disable watching, and you'll have to wait until the change from bugzilla:19090 is live. Amalthea 06:39, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I just checked, I don't. Cureden 15:28, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Are you partaking in the beta, i.e. are using the new Vector skin? Amalthea 18:05, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I was, but I returned to the old style. Has it a new bearing on formatting, or something? Cureden 20:55, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

For the problem at hand, it means that it was looking for your Twinkle config in User:Cureden/vector.js, not User:Cureden/monobook.js, and consequently fell back on the default of "watch everything". I assume your watchlist settings are working again now that you switched back? Amalthea 21:31, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I have a question about Twinkle. Are we allowed to customize the scripts on our user account like say add some code or remove things that I don't want? I just want to make sure its okay since the code is publicly displayed I assume you can copy it over to my monobook.js and modify it.. Thanks in advance. Tgv8925 (talk) 07:06, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

By the way, Twinkle is an awesome script. It really makes undoing edits like vandalism easier without having to click multiple times. Good job! Tgv8925 (talk) 07:11, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

You can, of course, as you can with all content licensed under

CC-by-SA. To comply with the license, you should wikilink the source of the content in the first edit summary.
However, maintaining a fork will only make sense in some circumstances. I'm not sure what changes you have in mind, but patches and feature additions, as long as they are found useful for enough people, are always welcome of course. :)
Amalthea

11:44, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Like a couple of others above (in. TW-B-320), when I rollback a page using Twinkle, it gets added to my watchlist. This doesn't happen when I edit without Twinkle. I am not running beta (as far as I know). On my preferences page, "add pages I edit to my watchlist" is unchecked, and I even tried checking, saving, and then re-unchecking and saving, but it's still happening. I'd love to fix this...anything I can do on my end? If it involves the "monobook.js" file, please bear with me, as I don't know where that is or how to find it. Thanks, Jordgette (talk) 21:08, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I've placed some code to configure Twinkle in your monobook.js file (

bypass your browser cache once before you see any changes, but probably not since you haven't had a monobook.js so far. Cheers, Amalthea

21:22, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Amalthea, that seemed to work! -Jordgette (talk) 23:45, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Good to hear that it isn't completely broken after all, thanks for getting back. :) Amalthea 08:18, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Has something been changed in Twinkle? I no longer see rollback links on diffs. I have it installed as a Gadget if that matters. Thanks. —Ost (talk) 20:20, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm guessing you've switched to the beta and are now getting javascript errors due to some other incompatible scripts – check you javascript console to find out which one is causing it, please. Twinkle by itself is working quite fine with the vector skin. Amalthea 21:06, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. The problem occurred both in Beta and in monobook when I then left beta to try to get the links back, so I'm not sure it was a Vector problem. It's now working now and I haven't changed anything, so I didn't get to check my javascript console to determine a root cause. —Ost (talk) 14:23, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I have enabled TWinkle on my preferences and have even put the script on my monobook, but when I do the "bypass the cache" thing I get the tabs, but it won't let me use them. Says I'm "too new to use huggle". I've been here seven months, have made 4300+ edits, and I'm damn sure I'm autoconfirmed. Anybody know what's wrong?

No I don't, but one person has previously reported a similar issue. A couple of things:

• What browser & version are you using?
• Does your javascript console report anything, when you are at a page where Twinkle says you're too new to use Twinkle (I assume "Huggle" was a typo)?
• Just to be sure, when you are on such a page, can you look at the page source, search for "wgUserGroups", and confirm that it says "autoconfirmed" in that line?

Amalthea 20:34, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh crap. I think I've identified the problem. I misread the instructions. I've got internet explorer. That's it, isn't it.

P.S, I'm signing out now, I have to sleep,

, (I am a flesh-eating robot)

20:58, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Yep. Thanks for getting back. :) Amalthea 21:07, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Could Twinkle be programmed to delete the talk pages of articles it deletes with the dePROD feature? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:37, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

yes. _→AzaToth 19:16, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello, this is my doppelganger account from admrboltz (talk · contribs) where I have successfully installed and been using Twinkle for a while now. I have been trying to install it both by importing importScript('User:AzaToth/twinkle.js');, and by using the Gadgets tab. I can not get it to show up at all in either Opera or Firefox. I even deleted by monobook.js file and cleared the cache again and tried straight from gadgets and its still not working. Help? --Εω (talk) 19:35, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Based on your contributions and logs, it appears it's because your account's not four days old yet. Accounts have to be autoconfirmed to use Twinkle. So without looking at your monobook, I'd say you're probably doing everything right, but your doppelganger account is just not old enough yet. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:32, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. I'll wait a few days and look again. Thanks! --Admrboltz (talk) 07:11, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I've changed Twinkle to allow

WP:TW/DOC#Trouble.
Cheers, Amalthea

07:55, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Works now. Thanks! --εω (talk) 17:31, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Moved from WT:FRIENDLY § Adding userfication to friendly

User talk:Calaka had a great idea, adding a WP:userfication button to friendly. This would give the Wikipedia:New pages patrol a new tool.

For example:

Editor User:John loves Clowns creates a really bad article which is a notable subject, but probably needs more work before being on main space

The article is named:

Bob the clown

Friendly could :

1. move the page to User:John loves Clowns/Bob the clown
2. redirect put up for deletion with {{db-r2}} / {{db-rediruser}},
3. Notify the new editor of the move, and counsel the new editor about what user space is, and the importance of notability.

Thank you in advance.

Ikip, I think if anything this should be added to Twinkle, as a CSD option for articles. But I'm not sure I'm particularly comfortable with encouraging aggressive userfication, and *if* it is to be encouraged, the code needs to be a littler smarter, by e.g. commenting out categories, interwikis, maintainance templates, and probably adding a {{

noindex}}. Amalthea

20:49, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Interesting idea. Gosh knows that the project receives visits and contributions from hundreds of well-meaning new editors... who by their lack of understanding of the procedures and mandates within these pages. often get potentially notable beginnings immediately set for deletion by the very well-meaning guardians at New Pages Patrol. If a new and versatile tool is available that could encourage newcomers to continue work and seek input... what a boon it could be. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 21:54, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Amalthea: I don't mind in particular where it gets classified under, so long as it does the job hehe (should someone make this posting over at Twinkle?). Would a solution to not having to remove all of the category,template, maintaintenance code just be to have a <nowiki>Insert non-formatted text here</nowiki> right between the article, perhaps explaining to the users that once they are ready to place the article back on the mainspace all they need to do is remove that bit of code (which should be incorporated in the initial message that told them that their page was userified)? I agree with the no index aspect as well. I also guess that userification would be up to the individual making an assessment. Should we CSD the obvious POV/selling a product articles? Should we do a quick Google search before we userify a band/person/etc. Finally, should the userification process somehow be incorporated with

WP:AFC

? I.e. they create a one line stub, we move it to their user page telling them that once they are ready they can either re submit it to the mainspace or bring it over to WP:AFC for someone to have a look at, once given the all clear it gets published and lives on (to hopefully be expanded on even further!).

Michael: I guess if this process would lead to turning off less potentially good users that would make great contributions in the future then it would be worth the implementation. I am not sure how easy it is to add all this in friendly/twinkle etc. but hopefully it won't require too much effort/time. Calaka (talk) 07:52, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, categories and interwikis are usually enclosed in <nowiki> tags, maintainance templates can be removed or commented out. Amalthea 09:53, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

What I'm wondering the most is if such an active encouragement of NPPers to userfy salvageable articles is a good thing in the first place, and what criteria have to be fullfilled to allow userfication by an NPPer.
It almost certainly has to be tied to the

09:53, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah it seems that this will require a set of guidelines to come into place to somehow work out the differences. Do you think it would be even worth making a RfC proposal? I will try and post my thoughts in a table form but maybe they need to be modified to what is the general accepted view:

Scenario	Userify	AfD	CsD
One liner with no refs. Google shows potential.	Y	N	N
One liner with no refs. Google shows nothing.	N	N	Y
POV/stock promotion of company/product. Only official websites.	Y or N? - Would making it neutral "promote it to userify status"?	Y	N (Assertion of notability)
Singer/Group/Band	Y or N? - Again contentious. The "Myspace/Twitter/Facebook/YouTube only" ref combo would probably see it on CSD. Should they be given a chance on their own space?	Y (if ref includes more than above mentioned stock that is still POV/promotional?)	Y
Village/settlement/Unknown landmark/river etc.	Y (If Google shows it exists... e.g. Google maps would have it covered) - Otherwise N	N/A (since if no evidence that it exists and no ref, then straight to CSD?)	Y (if no ref and nothing on Google).
Bio article - living	Y - If NPOV?, If it is just an ad/promoting himself N	Y - To own website only	Y - Only if no ref
Bio article - Not living (Pre 19th century for example?)	YY (c.f. the living where it is more contentious)	Y	N
Template/Skeleton article (i.e. it has templates/infobox of some sort but no text!)	Y (Since we are not WP:MINDREADER and assuming there is no "under construction tag")	N	N - Assuming userification is the nicer option.

There would surely be many more standard scenarios that constantly crop up though? Oh and obviously personal attacks, hoaxes, nonesense and pure vandalism would not be userified straight up. Also would articles that user deletes/requests deletion not be touched? Should we tell them that they have the potential to work on the article on their user page?

Also there are those that are the COI only accounts. What is the pattern of them? I.e. do they just make an article about their specific brand and then never edit Wikipedia again (until a new album or new product by their company is released?). Should we help those that are here just for promotional purposes to userify their articles? Will that be too much time and effort for the low amount they will contribute to Wikipedia? But is that just generalizing? Can we guess that maybe some would stay on in addition to promoting their product to help in other aspects of Wikipedia?

Again I stress that the above is not set in stone and might not even represent what I have personally been doing in my time at new pages patrol. But if something like the above can be agreed upon based on consensus then that would lead to better knowing when to userify/AfD/CSD and subsequently placing up the userify button among the AfD/Prod/CSD ranks. Perhaps? Kind regards.Calaka (talk) 11:08, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I've left a pointer at

WT:NPP. I'm not sure yet how controversial this might be, we could still advertise it more centrally if it is. :) Amalthea

11:39, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Amalthea: Not sure re: how controversial could this become. I hope it is nothing serious, but due to the vast amount of opinions out there, you can never be too safe hehe.Calaka (talk) 12:22, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I often userfy non-notable auto biographies to their authors user page, and I think it would be helpful if newpage patrollers could do that - they'd still need to tag the redirect for speedy deletion but it would be a lot less bitey for newbies.

I would also support testpages by newbies to be userfied as their sandbox.

I find that about half the articles tagged as no-context are easily salvagable, and feel they are more likely to be salvaged if left in mainspace. So would not support New page patrollers having the option to userfy such stubs - just because the first draft of an article is really bad or absolutely minimal is not a valid reason for deletion, and therefore is not a valid reason for userfication.

I disagree with userfying articles on identifiable subjects which are aiming for mainspace. Either the subject is potentially worth having an article on in which case "x is a village in y state z country" is a start, or it should be deleted. ϢereSpielChequers 12:03, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

In case userfication is not desirable, there is a new central repository springing up at

WP:INCUBATE for xactly this kind of thing Fritzpoll (talk

) 12:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm delighted we're having this conversation, it dovetails with something I proposed yesterday at WT:RFA, that we unbundle the userright of "moving without leaving a redirect behind" for certain editors. I'll be watching closely. - Dank (push to talk) 12:27, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I think Amalthea's first comment was spot on. Admins might benefit for having it easier to userfy articles but it's a part of the CSD process imho. Delete, keep, userfy as three different approaches to an valid CSD tagging. I dread to see NP patrollers, for all the good work they do, userfying articles en masse because they deem them unfit for current inclusion. For the same reason, they cannot delete them as well. Userfication and deletion have the same impact on the article creator in terms of BITEyness and thus should be done by admins as the second set of eyes on a CSD tagging. I would also oppose Dan's suggestion because that would in fact allow those users to remove articles from sight without a clearly identifiable trail which is exactly what they should not be able to do (hence it's an admin-only option). Regards SoWhy 13:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Agree with SoWhy. Any user can userfy as it is, but it should not be presented to CSD-ers as an "easy" alternative to CSD tagging for a doubtful article. Another point: while there are certainly articles that should be userfied while they are brought up to standard, there are also many that are never going to be acceptable, and I see some danger that a non-notable garage band (say) would be happy, as second best, to keep a userfied page as "Our Wiki page" indefinitely. I would like any proposal that encourages userfication to include guidance that the editor who userfies retains some responsibility for that page, and should check after (say) a month to see whether any progress is being made towards an acceptable article, and if not re-propose deletion. JohnCD (talk) 14:06, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't view this as a good idea. As pointed out, auto-confirmed users can already userify articles. However, encouraging them to do so is a bad idea. From experience, very few userified articles are ever improved - and that is when the userification is specifically requested. Userifying an article without it being requested first will just leave useless articles in userspace indefinitely with almost no hope of being improved. Additionally, many admins follow up on articles they have userified and delete them if there is no improvement after some amount of time (a month perhaps) - a regular use obviously can't do that. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:06, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

On further reflection and having read the subsequent discussion I would like to suggest the following revised matrix which just has two userfy options, the current one and a new one for test pages. I'm assuming that in both cases a gentle note that your page has been moved from x to y is less bitey than your page has been nominated for deletion. I have some concerns with a further unbundling of the tools, but if it happened this could work with a move without redirect option being given out to good new page patrol taggers in a similar way to the way we give Rollback to vandal fighters.

Scenario	Userfy	AfD	CsD
Obviously a test per {{ db-test }} by newbie with no sandbox.	Y Userfy to User sandbox and tag redirect for speedy deletion	N	Y Some tests are euphemisms for borderline vandalism and best speedy deleted
Bio article - living	Y - Userfy to User page if autobiography with no claim to importance/significance	Y - Referenced but unnotable	Y - Only if Unreferenced or no claim to importance/significance

Note that neither case involves userfying potential articles.

The latter group often involves info that needs to be oversighted, but if a child or adolescent names their pets, hobbies, aspirations, school and schoolmates in an autobiography I think it is much less bitey to userfy the bits of their page that don't mention oversight and give them a welcome template than template them that their article is being nominated for deletion.

This would only be a small change to the process, but I think a reasonably uncontentious one that almost all could accept as an improvement. ϢereSpielChequers 15:42, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

As a comment on the proportion of userfied articles which will actually get improved: when doing New Page Patrol I frequently userfy autobiographies into the user page, with a welcome message and a note to the user than s/he can recreate but should first read WP:BIO and WP:AUTO. I keep a list of the usernames, and recently did a check back - of the last 50, exactly three have since made any edit that was not about themselves. (Another four re-input their autobiography and it was speedied.) For individuals, that doesn't matter, but with bands, companies and so on, I think we might get a similar proportion of userfied articles which are never improved to be worth bringing back to main space. Yes, those few which are improved represent a gain to the project, but we do need some follow-up on the, probably much larger, number which are not. JohnCD (talk) 16:11, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Are abandoned userfied articles a real problem, even in large numbers? I would prefer to avoid them, but I can't see that a mass clean-up (mostly deletion) would have consensus. Flatscan (talk) 04:59, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Maybe not a serious problem, as long as search engines don't pick them up, but I think that, for example, we might find non-notable garage bands who couldn't have an article using WP as a web-host by maintaining a userfied article as "our Wiki page" with news of their search for a drummer, intention to release a song on Youtube, etc. See, for example, this user page. JohnCD (talk) 08:44, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Which they do. All pages in userspace are by default indexed and found by search engines, and e.g. userfied non-neutral article on "Americans for Educational Testing Reform" was the top Google hit (above the official page) until I de-userfied it again. Which is part of why like

WP:INCUBATE a lot, where userfied pages can be kept and maintained centralized, and the whole bunch can be excluded from indexing via MediaWiki:robots.txt. Amalthea

10:26, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Aaaargh! That's horrible! Why are pages in user-space indexed by default, and can anything be done about it? That's a larger question than this discussion, and maybe I should take it up elsewhere. But I think it confirms my view that large numbers of abandoned userfied articles could be a problem, and that there should be guidance on userfying not-(yet)-suitable-for-the-mainspace articles which should say that the editor who userfies is responsible for (a) putting a __NOINDEX__ "magic-word" on the page (b) watchlisting it to make sure that's not taken off, and (c) checking after a suitable period - a month? two months? - to see whether anything is being done to make the article acceptable, and if not organising its deletion. JohnCD (talk) 14:16, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

There was a recent RfC on the issue: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User page indexing. Amalthea 14:29, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh, dear, so there was, and they got the answer wrong. I haven't read all the arguments yet, but I doubt if I shall be convinced. That confirms my worries. Perhaps every user page should carry a banner, more conspicuous than {{

WP:INCUBATE; what should be added to Twinkle is an "Incubate" button, not a "Userfy" one. JohnCD (talk

) 16:08, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I had intended to mention NOINDEX'd user drafts, but that RfC moots that discussion. Keeping the pages in Incubator space should be easier than maintaining a tag, and move protection can be used in extreme cases. Flatscan (talk) 03:48, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

• Much too much overthinking going on here. Any autoconfirmed editor can userfy articles to other people at will, and we don't have a rule either to encourage or stop them. We have never needed such a rule, and we don't need one now. Much of the above discussion is a solution in search of a problem.

  I think that if Ikip wants to userfy an article to someone, that's a matter for his editorial judgment. It's certainly not a matter requiring supervision, intervention, or any other kind of

  WP:CREEP from other editors unless or until it's actually shown that it leads to a problem.

  I support the addition of this feature to Twinkle.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont

  18:38, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
  • This is a slightly different discussion from WT:Articles for deletion#Userification without creators consent but with nominators consent. I think it's reasonable to consider possible large-scale impact before giving the tool to NPP for use en masse. Flatscan (talk) 04:59, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
    • I respectfully disagree. The last thing we need to do is arrogate even more centralised controls over editorial judgment.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 08:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Hmm, I'm not looking for a problem, nor was I intending to start a guideline page: I was looking for input whether mass userfication by NPPers is found to be a good thing and should be encouraged by offering script-assistance, and if so, in what circumstances. Answers to these questions decide whether to add it as a CSD option, or as an additional deletion tab en par with AfD/PROD/CSD, and if there is no consensus that mass userfication is a good thing then I probably won't waste time implementing it at all (although others are free to).
    And yes, the options offered by Twinkle quite certainly have a direct impact on how many new editors approach NPP. I myself hadn't read the SD criteria before tagging my first articles for deletion, which is why I tagged a number of articles that I believed were useless as "Little or no context", since that seemed to fit best. That might have been my editorial judgement, but it was against consensus. Similarily, if there is a script option "userfy article unfit for main space", people will use it. Getting a grasp on what the community thinks and presenting the option accordingly is not a needless restriction, it will prevent needless conflicts. Amalthea 10:26, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

• I agree that sending "unfit articles" to an
  WP:INCUBATE like place is a far better idea than userifying them. That way they 1) have a better chance of being improved and 2) can more readily be monitored for improvement. It would serve the same purpose as userify in that it might feel less bitey - and would probly actually do a better job of that goal. Which is less likely to bite: "your article wasn't good enough so I moved it to your user space to be improved" or "your article wasn't good enough so I moved it to a centralized location where it can be improved to meet our standards by yourself or others willing to help"? --ThaddeusB (talk
  ) 20:02, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
• Okay, so, can we add a feature to move articles to wikipedia:incubate? If it doesnt work, we could always just remove the feature. Incubate members could remove the categories etc. which would not belong to a user space article manually for now. Automatically adding a noindex tag when they are moved to incubate would be ideal, but that can be done manually for now too.
  talk
  ) 20:15, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I would just as happily support this as the userify feature, whatever the means, the hope being that this will hopefully lead to an increase in volunteers on Wikipedia (due to the concern that CSD might (does?) scare of a vast amount of new contributors and an improvement on the new articles that show a potential to be more.Calaka (talk) 08:41, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Even such a button should be admin-only though imho. Maybe NP patrollers can tag articles with a CSD like tag like {{incubation-suggested}} (better name welcome) using Twinkle and admins can decide whether to send it there or not. Making it easier for users to do so or even encouraging them to do so against the creator's will is equal to userfication and thus equally BITEy. I support such a button as an alternative for admins to CSD deletion but it should be written down and established that it needs more than a single NP patroller's judgment to send articles there. Standards are vastly different and the many mistaggings that happen daily show that not everyone using Twinkle should be allowed to decide something like that. Regards SoWhy 08:57, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

{{incubation-suggested}} sounds fair to me and would work as a good check (as you said correctly, like how an admin is the one that deletes the CSD while anyone can nominate it). My first thought was that this might mean extra work for the admins (i.e. instead of the user adding the tag sending the article to the incubator process) but I remembered soon after that it very well was going to be the same article that was going to be deleted so there will be no difference in terms of admin workload anyway.Calaka (talk) 09:39, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

As I explained on

WT:INCUBATE

:

I appreciate the concern.

That said, can't we simply educate editors about what is and is not approriate on a individual basis, much like how almost everything else is done on wikipedia?

Since any editor can nominate articles for deletion, which is much, much, much bitier than incubation, I don't think adding restrictions on incubation for the rest of us who are not admins is a good idea.

If I were to propose that all AFDs were have to be approved by admins, there would be an uproar.

Will admins be free to move articles to incubation at will, without a second admin reviewing their decision?

I think a lot of editors would never start using the incubation method if we created barriers to entry. I think editors have grown accustomed to instantaneous results on wikipedia, not having to wait in a bottle neck for admins to approve our actions. That is why Flagged revisions has met such resistance.

We can look at this later if the need arises, but I would prefer less centralized control over this entire process, and focus on troubles when they arise, on an individual editor basis.

talk

) 15:06, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

You make a very good point Ikip. When I agreed with the suggestion I was thinking of incubate to be along the same lines of a CSD in that anyone can nominate it, but only an admin deletes it. In this same way, anyone can nominate the article to go to incubator and then only an admin is allowed to transfer it over after agreeing with the initial request. The assumption here is that there will be no backlog (in that it takes one button to delete a CSD and one button to take it over to WP:Incubate). But yeah, it would be nice if the users themselves were given control to be able to take the article to incubate themselves. I guess it is just a matter of trust, and how much the average Wikipedian can trust the general New Patroller crowd in ensuring the stuff that goes to Incubate is reasonable. Setting up the guidelines and formats (as seems to be happening over at the INCUBATE page seems reasonable). To add further to this, perhaps everyone that patrols new pages (identified by having the userbox) can be sent a mass message for them to ensure that prior to using the new button that is to be implemented they read the guidelines and we can go from there. The bugs can be ironed out as we go. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Calaka (talk • contribs)

I wonder if I could have handled this better. The worst thing I could do is alienate SoWhy, who I strongly support and admire. This discussion also is taking place on

talk

) 16:05, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Every time I try reverting edits I get a "couldn't get editform" because of possible "failed response from server". Are there any server problems?

See bug report above.  7  00:48, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I installed Adobe Download Manager (1,6,2,44) earlier today as an add on in firefox. When I rollback using twinkle for some reason the add on opens up. Has anyone else found the same thing? Smartse (talk) 16:09, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Twinkle is not working for me, I need help, Friendly is, but Twinkle isn't showing up! Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Programmer101 (talk • contribs) 14:40, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

autoconfirmed. Amalthea

17:16, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Does anyone mind if i create an alternative template to this to show if it is clear that the user is doing more than one test but not vandalism? If yes, after creation could peopleshow it as alt to test1 and sort all coding for more tech stuff? Simply south (talk) 11:34, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Resolved

Not being familiar with Twinkle, is it possible to require users to input a reason parameter when using Twinkle to warn users with this template? I am finding a lot of instances of this template warning being left on talk pages (using TW) without the parameter, which results in a big red "NO REASON GIVEN" and makes the notice extremely unhelpful to the user in question. Thanks, Shereth 15:53, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

YFixed Hacked. Amalthea 17:39, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Y Fixed less hackily.

friendly

) 21:24, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Debatable I guess, it's still an explicit exception in the middle of the code. :) Cheers, Amalthea 10:02, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

I think the notice left by Twinkle is redundant as talk pages of IP users now have their own notification about sharing and messages. I know you can set it to false manually, but should it be turned off in twinkle by default?

Opinions? The interface message can be seen e.g. at User talk:59.94.167.78. Amalthea 10:04, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

I think the extra shared message should be left in. I know that I for one usually see my own talk page messages via the diff, and read it solely off the diff in most cases. I would think that many IP users do the same. Thus the extra bit's being part of the message ensures it gets read. It also encourages people to get an account, and the message going to the wrong person makes for a perfect example of why people need to create an account. SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:34, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Resolved

Hello, Twinkle. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2009_September_14.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Courtesy notice as two of these may be deleted very soon. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:43, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

I am going to delete

Y Done, thanks for the notice. Cheers, Amalthea 21:07, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I was on a page and then I got a message saying "Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to James Cook. Your edits constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. TREKphiler hit me ♠ 23:05, 9 December 2008 (UTC)". I hadn't done anything on that page. --74.242.43.167 (talk) 19:35, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

That was an old vandalism warning message (from December 2008). It appears that you use a dynamic IP, in which case you probably didn't make the edit in question. You can ignore the warning because of this and its age. 「

? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000

20:27, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like a good reason for this person to register an account on here. SchuminWeb (Talk) 12:26, 26 September 2009 (UTC)