Legality of Cannabis by U.S. Jurisdiction

Content deleted Content added
ToprakM (talk | contribs)
Line 114: Line 114:
:{{Re|LaundryPizza03}} The page formatting had been damaged, but it may be OK now. Could you try it again? -- [[User:John of Reading|John of Reading]] ([[User talk:John of Reading|talk]]) 06:24, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
:{{Re|LaundryPizza03}} The page formatting had been damaged, but it may be OK now. Could you try it again? -- [[User:John of Reading|John of Reading]] ([[User talk:John of Reading|talk]]) 06:24, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
::{{checkmark}} –[[User:LaundryPizza03|<b style="color:#77b">Laundry</b><b style="color:#fb0">Pizza</b><b style="color:#b00">03</b>]] ([[User talk:LaundryPizza03|<span style="color:#0d0">d</span>]][[Special:Contribs/LaundryPizza03|<span style="color:#0bf">c̄</span>]]) 08:10, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
::{{checkmark}} –[[User:LaundryPizza03|<b style="color:#77b">Laundry</b><b style="color:#fb0">Pizza</b><b style="color:#b00">03</b>]] ([[User talk:LaundryPizza03|<span style="color:#0d0">d</span>]][[Special:Contribs/LaundryPizza03|<span style="color:#0bf">c̄</span>]]) 08:10, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

== Move discussion in progress regarding renaming [[WP:XFD]] notification templates ==

There is a move discussion in progress on [[Template talk:Afd notice#Requested move 21 April 2020 |Template talk:Afd notice]] which affects most, if not all, of the notification templates for [[WP:XFD]] discussions that are used by Twinkle. Since moving these pages to new titles affects Twinkle, participants and watchers of this page are invited to participate in the move discussion on that page Thank you. [[User:Steel1943|<span style="color: #2F4F4F;">'''''Steel1943'''''</span>]] ([[User talk:Steel1943|talk]]) 19:40, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:40, 21 April 2020

Template

Hello!

Twinkle adds {{di-disputed fair use rationale}} to files perfectly, and also leaves a note on the user's page. Can someone add the same function for {{di-fails NFCC}}? This would be very appreciated.Jonteemil (talk) 14:48, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Twinkle doesn't use this template; I think some of the F7 options are better suited. ~ Amory (ut • c) 19:29, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Amorymeltzer: I know it doesn't, however my wish is that it do. I use {{di-fails NFCC}} fairly often and it would be nice to don't have to add it manually to the file page and the user's talk page.Jonteemil (talk) 17:17, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Amorymeltzer: Ping.Jonteemil (talk) 01:19, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It would also be good if {{Bad SVG}} were added.Jonteemil (talk) 04:03, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jonteemil: I am not familiar with image templates. {{di-disputed fair use rationale}} is included in Twinkle's DI menu because it's connected to F7. What speedy deletion criterion is {{di-fails NFCC}} related to?
{{Bad SVG}}, on the other hand, can be added to the Tag menu. SD0001 (talk) 16:22, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@SD0001: Also F7. Do you know how to add {{Bad SVG}}?Jonteemil (talk) 16:25, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jonteemil: will do that. di-fails NFCC template has a large number of criteria. Is it enough to allow support for one of the criteria to be selected? Or is it necessary to allow multiple criteria selections? If the latter is true, it won't be possible to support this template in TW. SD0001 (talk) 16:40, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What's the need that di-fails NFCC fills? ~ Amory (ut • c) 18:57, 17 March 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amory (talk • contribs) [reply]

@Amorymeltzer: It makes the user being able to specify what criterion the file fails and makes it therefor easier for the user who uploaded the file to understand why the file is being proposed for deletion.Jonteemil (talk) 14:16, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@SD0001: I, myself, have never used more than one criterion on the same file however the template is constructed so that you can, if you want to. I'd rather see the template on Twinkle where you only can choose one criterion at a time, than to not have the template on Twinkle at all. So if you can get the template on Twinkle it would be awesome, even if the multiple criteria option isn't possible.Jonteemil (talk) 14:16, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
890 SD0001 (talk) 17:11, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@SD0001: I would also like {{Non-free svg upscale}} to be added. Is this possible?Jonteemil (talk) 11:52, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure, is it widely used? Since it doesn't take any parameters, you could just add it as a custom tag for yourself via WP:TWPREFS. SD0001 (talk) 14:21, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@SD0001: I noticed now that RonBot upscaled those SVGs but that bot isn't active anymore so I don't think the tagging of the template will make anything.Jonteemil (talk) 10:41, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SD0001 and Amorymeltzer: Hello again! I just wanted to check on the status regarding the implementation of {{Di-fails NFCC}} and {{SVG upscale}} (renamed from {{Non-free svg upscale}}) into Twinkle. Will it be done? If so, when?Jonteemil (talk) 14:21, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Worth mentioned is that DatBot probably will take over RonBot's task of maintaining {{SVG upscale}} so that template is still to be used after all.Jonteemil (talk) 14:22, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Jonteemil, I'm still not 100% on just straight-up adding {{Di-fails NFCC}}. It's not recommended or even listed at WP:F7. JJMC89, you've used it recently, do you have any thoughts? Aren't various WP:NFCCP items covered by F5 as well?
I think the larger issue is that F5-7 are very specific, and don't do a good job of implying coverage of every aspect of WP:NFCCP. Is that a fair read? Basically, F7 is Invalid fair-use claim (emphasis added) rather than Violates non-free use policy. ~ Amory (ut • c) 20:43, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really think that it is worth adding. For criteria 1, 2, 4, 7, 10a, 10b, and 10c there are more specific templates that should be used instead, {{di-replaceable fair use}}, {{db-f7}}, {{di-no source|non-free=yes}} (F4), {{di-orphaned fair use}}/{{db-f5}} (F5), {{di-dw no source|non-free=yes}} (F4), {{di-no license}} (F4), {{di-no fair use rationale}} (F6)/{{di-missing article links}}, respectively. (Some have shorter deletion delays.) For criterion 9, no tagging, just remove the use. My most common uses of {{di-fails NFCC}} are for criteria 3a and 8, which can be covered by {{di-disputed fair use rationale}} easily enough. — JJMC89(T·C) 00:16, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Warning Levels

When using the Warn module, I'm getting the impression Twinkle can choose the correct warning level itself. That is, if the current month exists a talk page section, and it already has a message using, say Template:uw-vandalism1, then the Twinkle warning for "vandalism" will be Template:uw-vandalism2.

  • If so, the documentation does not make this clear.
  • If not, the documentation does not make that clear.

Also, does this depend on whether Twinkle was used previously? Does it work for handcrafted warnings? Warnings posted through other tools such as Huggle? Here's the specific example that made me come here and ask: User talk:113.20.22.106.

Which is it, and please update the documentation to clarify any confusion. Thx CapnZapp (talk) 11:14, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's a planned feature, Amorymeltzer can confirm. --qedk (t c) 21:11, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes indeed — I've been somewhat otherwise occupied lately, and there have been a lot of structural changes causing conflicts, but I'll try and get to it sooner rather than later! CZ, what was causing you confusion? ~ Amory (ut • c) 01:04, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
My main concern is getting the documentation to explain what Twinkle does and doesn't do in this regard. As an example, see the talk page I linked to above. I expected Twinkle to insert a level 2 template but it inserted a level 1 warning. I tried to make sure I gave the exact same kind of warning, but that didn't help. And so I ask - was this because of the previous warning being issued by non-Twinkle (i.e Huggle) or something else? Could I have done anything? Can Twinkle even do this??
As a friendly reminder, I'm not asking for personal support (I'm content leaving that page as is) so don't feel compelled to answer me here on talk. I'm hoping the documentation will explain what to expect of Twinkle. In other words, my preferred way of getting a reply is "I've updated the doc, does the edit I made answer your query?" Cheers CapnZapp (talk) 09:50, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Twinkle never claims to automatically detect warning levels, it's probably an assumption you're carrying over from Huggle. The documentation doesn't even hint that it does anything more than post the warning that you select, hence I don't see what can be changed. --qedk (t c) 13:48, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SPI reports

Recently had to deal with an SPI report which Twinkle filed on the wrong page.

Would it be possible to check when filing an SPI report at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/sockmaster, if the page (if it already exists) includes {{SPIarchive notice|some other master}}, (or {{SPI archive notice|some other master}} with a space) then the report should be filed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/some other master, and the same check should be performed until the pagename matches the master declared inside the page. Thanks, Cabayi (talk) 12:05, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mutually exclusive tags

From time to time I see images that have been tagged with both {{BadJPEG}} and {{Overcompressed JPEG}} simultaneously, and the edit summary indicates they were tagged using Twinkle. This is nonsense, as the two templates are mutually exclusive. The error seems to derive from two factors:

  • The inline description of {{Overcompressed JPEG}} in the Twinkle UI is vague - "JPEG with high levels of artifacts".
  • Twinkle doesn't validate the set of checkboxes the user has ticked when using the Tag feature (except for "You must select at least one tag!") as far as I can see.

Of course, there are other tags that are mutually exclusive, but these are the pair I most often seem to see inappropriately used together.

It would be good if the tool could be improved a bit to lessen this:

  • by amending the description a bit. "JPEG is suitable format, but there are high levels of artifacts" or similar, maybe?
  • by adding validation that kicks in when the user presses Submit Query and pops up a message / blocks the submission if the user has selected any of certain pairs of mutually exclusive tags including this.

Smjg (talk) 09:51, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Smjg, There are some checks, but mainly for article tags. I do think there should be some for images. How about:
There are other, more granular checks I can imagine (such as with {{Artifacts}}) but I think those would be enough to start with, yeah?
Regarding the two you mention, maybe I'm reading them wrong, but they don't have to be mutually exclusive, right? {{Overcompressed JPEG}} says "Yo this JPEG has artifacts, please fix (and also maybe don't be jpeg)" while {{Bad JPEG}} says "This really shouldn't be a JPEG, change it please." Couldn't someone apply both to a non-photographic JPEG with artifacts? ~ Amory (ut • c) 20:08, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Amorymeltzer: You are indeed reading them wrong. {{Overcompressed JPEG}} is specifically for images for which the use of JPEG format is appropriate but which have the compression strength set too high. This is naturally mutually exclusive with the use of JPEG format being inappropriate. Indeed, if you ignored the "the use of JPEG format is appropriate" criterion then most if not all {{BadJPEG}} images would be {{Overcompressed JPEG}} as well, somewhat defeating the point of having the two separate templates. — Smjg (talk) 22:48, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, yeah; I guess I was reading Overcompressed as too broad. The rest sounds good? ~ Amory (ut • c) 18:39, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mobile Support

I know this has been asked a lot of times and I know part of it is because of MediaWiki mobile limitations... but considering that Twinkle is one of the most essential tools on Wikipedia, are there any plans or efforts to somehow get Twinkle on the mobile version of Wikipedia? Like many people these days, I monitor my watchlist on my phone... and it's kind of a pain having to "request desktop" version every time I need to use Twinkle for common tasks like CSD, non-vandalism rollback, warn user etc. Is there any hope in sight? — Starforce13 17:05, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

trwiki

Unlink module doesn't work on trwiki. Can you help work? Thanks. ToprakM (talk) 11:23, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What are the errors you're getting? I'd assume that, since the morebits was only changed for 3 minutes, any changes weren't propagated. ~ Amory (ut • c) 18:46, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not getting any errors. When I confirm the unlink, the empty menu appears. ToprakM (talk) 12:36, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Making subsequent deletions

When a topic is once again nominated for deletion, it displays the article name along with text in the brackets as (2nd nomination). In Malayalam Wikipedia, it is dislayed as 2 മത് നാമനിർദ്ദേശം. It needs to be displayed as രണ്ടാമത് നാമനിർദ്ദേശം (proof). How can this be done? Adithyak1997 (talk) 14:38, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Change the text in the RegExp.escape bit at line 524 of ml:മീഡിയവിക്കി:Gadget-twinklexfd.js. ~ Amory (ut • c) 18:50, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Adithyak1997: That nomination wasn't made using TW. The Twinkle.xfd.num2order function near the top determines the naming, which is presently set to return num + '-ആമത്തെ' (which sounds more correct than num + 'മത് '). However, I don't think the automated naming actually works at present because the regex on line 525 to check for existing nominations is wrong (it looks for th|nd|rd|st which won't be there).
If you want the numbers to be in words, then you'd change num2order to something like switch( num ) { case 1: return ''; case 2: return രണ്ടാമത്; case 3: return 'moonamathe'; case 4: return 'naalamathe';}. But then you'll also have to change the logic on line 525 to look for these new types of names, which is quite involved - you can't do it with just regex any longer. SD0001 (talk) 07:17, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Technical problem for WP:RM/TR

Hi, I was unable to use Twinkle to file an uncontroversial technical RM from Template:Uw-lang to Template:Uw-engvar because the target section could not be located. The rationale read: This is not about languages in general, but English-language variants (i.e. [[WP:ENGVAR]]) specifically.LaundryPizza03 (d) 03:19, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@LaundryPizza03: The page formatting had been damaged, but it may be OK now. Could you try it again? -- John of Reading (talk) 06:24, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
checkYLaundryPizza03 (d) 08:10, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress regarding renaming WP:XFD notification templates

There is a move discussion in progress on Template talk:Afd notice which affects most, if not all, of the notification templates for WP:XFD discussions that are used by Twinkle. Since moving these pages to new titles affects Twinkle, participants and watchers of this page are invited to participate in the move discussion on that page Thank you. Steel1943 (talk) 19:40, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]