MediaWiki talk:PageTriageExternalDeletionTagsOptions.js

Protected edit request on 22 October 2018

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

‹ The template Edit fully-protected is being considered for merging. ›

The exact changes that have been implemented at a copy of this page at my user-space.

See this thread and this one. ∯WBG^converse 14:15, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done —CYBERPOWER (Trick or Treat) 17:45, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Interface-protected edit request on 9 August 2020

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

‹ The template Edit interface-protected is being considered for merging. ›

Thing 1: {{Db-notability-notice-NPF}} was moved to {{Db-significance-notice-NPF}}, see also phab:T259835. Applying Special:Diff/874921244/972021277 would bypass the left-behind redirect.

Done — xaosflux ^Talk 20:16, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thing 2: The header "unremarkable x" doesn't really describe WP:A7. This was changed in Twinkle (by myself and User:Amorymeltzer) to "No indication of importance (x)". Applying Special:Diff/874921244/972021997 would do this. Best, —Mdaniels5757 (talk) 18:48, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done — xaosflux ^Talk 20:18, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 25 August 2020

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

‹ The template Edit fully-protected is being considered for merging. ›

Please fix the label text on parameter 1 of dbg4 – the user needs to enter a wikilink, not a URL, and in fact a URL breaks the template. The line to be changed is identified with a comment below:

	"dbg4": {
		"label": "Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion",
		"tag": "speedy deletion-previously deleted",
		"code": "G4",
		"desc": "A sufficiently identical and unimproved copy, having any title, of a page deleted via its most recent deletion discussion. (G4)",
		"params": {
			"1": {
				"label": "Please add a link to the deletion discussion.",  <!--THIS LINE!-->
				"input": "required",
				"type": "text",
				"value": ""
			}
		},

—swpb^{T • go beyond • bad idea} 16:23, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done — xaosflux ^Talk 16:51, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 30 September 2022

It is requested that an edit be made to the interface page at MediaWiki:PageTriageExternalDeletionTagsOptions.js. (edit · history · last · links)

This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".

The edit may be made by any interface administrator. Remember to change the |answered=no parameter to "yes" when the request has been accepted, rejected or on hold awaiting user input. This is so that inactive or completed requests don't needlessly fill up the edit requests category. You may also wish to use the {{EIp}} template in the response. When the request has been completed or denied, please add the |answered=yes parameter to deactivate the template.

‹ The template Edit fully-protected is being considered for merging. ›

Please remove "subst:" from lines 1 and 3. The new lines would be:

$.pageTriageDeletionTagsOptions.Main.proposeddeletion.tags.prod.tag = 'prod';

$.pageTriageDeletionTagsOptions.Main.proposeddeletion.tags.blpprod.tag = 'blp-prod';

This would fix T313696. I've tested this out on my local wiki and with the help of Xaosflux, on the test wikipedia as well. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:50, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MPGuy2824 can you point to an article that you tested with, it should have been created, then you should use the tool to tag it with one of these reasons. The primary thing to be looking for here is that the diff that adds the template subst's the template. (i.e. {{prod}} shouldn't end up on the article un-subst'd). — xaosflux ^Talk 13:54, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Before your edit: [1]

After: [2], [3]. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 03:20, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Xaosflux: forgot to ping you when i replied. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:17, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]