Tips for writing good bug reports and feature requests:
Include the affected article name and a diff.
Include a screenshot.
For bugs, include the exact steps to reproduce the bug. Bugs need to be reproducible.
We will use this information to create a ticket on GitHub, which is our todo list for volunteer developers. For most tickets, expect them to take a long time (months). They will need to attract the interest of a volunteer developer, then go through code review, then get merged to master, then get deployed.
Twinkle has detailed documentation located at WP:TW/DOC.
This page has archives. Topics inactive for 30 days are automatically archived 1 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 30.
New template {{Welcome mentee}} is now available for widespread use by Mentors in the Growth Team's Mentorship program. Twinkle users signed up as mentors may wish to use it to welcome their mentees; please add it to the installation. Template {{Mentor welcome}} has been available through Twinkle for some time now; {{Welcome mentee}} is an alternative with more links and different features. There are dozens of welcome templates available at the Welcoming committee for non-mentors, but up until now, there was only one for mentors to place, and now there are two. Hopefully, more will be forthcoming. And a plug for the program: More mentors are needed, and signing up is easy; see WP:GT/ML#How do I sign up?. Thanks! Mathglot (talk) 08:23, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't normally concern myself these days with graphical changes to internal Wikipedia pages (some combination of "it's a lost cause" and "we have bigger fish to try"), but I'm going to make an exception here, since the current Twinkle logo (File:Police man Twinkle Head.svg) is uniquely bad. Laying out the specific reasons so that this isn't just WP:IDLI:
It doesn't fit the tool's name: There's nothing twinkling in it.
It doesn't fit the tool's contemporary purpose: It was created back in 2007, and my understanding of the history is that Twinkle then was primarily an anti-vandalism tool, for which a policeman arguably has some fit. But these days it's used for a much broader array of tasks.
It carries aggressive, exclusionary connotations: The logo is of a light-skinned male, which isn't optimal when we're trying to diversify our editorship. And not to get too political, but police officers in many countries (especially those with grumpy expressions like in the logo) carry connotations of aggression, authority, and other attributes that don't align well with the behavior we'd like to encourage among Twinkle users.
It's poorly designed: I didn't have to go to the file page to tell that it was made c. 2007 — the design has several qualities that make it feel dated. It scales poorly to small sizes (important for userboxen).
Together (even if you disagree with one or two of my reasons), these add up to an unsuitable logo, so I'd like to propose that we consider changing it to something new. Perhaps it could be related to twinkling (e.g. ✨) or perhaps someone could design something totally new (courtesy ping Triton, who I see made flat versions of the current logo in 2022). Perhaps if it's good enough we'd actually want to use it in the Twinkle tool's interface or on the Github repository page. Thoughts/suggestions? Sdkbtalk23:25, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think we probably want to move away from a person-based logo entirely. I suggested something to do with sparkling above, but beyond that I'll leave the design up to whoever wants to make something — I tend to find that design by committee works poorly, so it's better to go with whatever you think looks best. Sdkbtalk23:31, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I came across that; I'd have to dig into it further to determine whether there's anything there. But there are plenty of other reasons, even setting that aside, to change it. Sdkbtalk23:52, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am fully in support of a logo change. Once that's out of the way, we just need to bartender our way to a new one... thus far, both the paint-roller idea and the T-shaped star idea sound good. Toadspike[Talk]11:21, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that's definitely something I had in the back of my mind for a long time! Happy to see there's support for a change. I really don't like it being a police officer, or the very cop-like nature of many of Wikipedia's metaphor (the Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit also comes to my mind). Twinkle is more of a tool for helping with technical stuff, or at most housekeeping, than one for policing, and the logo should reflect that.Regarding the specific ideas that have been proposed, I like the idea of twinkling stars, although the ✨ symbol is (to my greatest regret) associated with AI and might be a bit misleading. We've got many other star arrangements that could work well, especially if we elongate the diffraction spikes in a T shape. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:28, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm currently working on a proposal of my own. I don't like how this one still looks like a small variation on the ✨symbol with slightly elongated spikes, especially on smaller screens. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 13:14, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No. The current logo is fine, and has been associated with Twinkle for virtually it's entire lifespan. I see no reason whatsoever why the current logo should be changed. Sugar Tax (talk) 13:16, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm always glad when we move away from gendered symbolism on Wikipedia. I like the star designs, but perhaps the T should be more clear. You see some software use the stars for AI magic, so that might become confusing. If the big star in CE's proposal is more like a T, that might work? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 14:52, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to make the smaller stars form the top bar of the T, as raising the middle bar of the big star might make it look like a Christian cross. Especially with stars, it's a bit easy to accidentally sprinkle in some religious symbolism, and I'm trying to also stay neutral in that regards. I'll try to see if I can get a design to make the T a bit clearer! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:33, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That does look a lot more T-shaped. The question is whether it's T-shaped enough. The top gives fairly triangular vibes. I really like the colors though. Toadspike[Talk]12:41, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ah okay, that makes more sense. If it isn't too much trouble, could you please try making a version with the "W" at the bottom as well? I think the order ("T" --> "W") might be clearer that way. Toadspike[Talk]21:01, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I appreciate the notice! I completely agree with all of your arguments in the main post, and I support changing the logo to some meaningful abstraction, as I love functional simplicity in design. Right now I don't have any bright ideas that I can bring to this topic that haven't already been brought up. But I can highlight some internal processes and requirements that I brought to designing the logo for my own tool - Instant Diffs.
The logo should contain some abstract metaphors for what the tool represents. In my logo I use two filled blocks drawn side-by-side in the same color that's used to highlight removed or added content in diffs. I left the top and bottom boxes outlined so they resemble a well-balanced weighing scale.
The logo should be readable in both color themes and at various sizes. To achieve readability in extreme cases, for example inline text emoji-like size, I resorted to the next point.
(optionally) It would be good if a simplified icon could be represented by some UTF-8 symbol that isn't used often in other contexts. I chose ❖ (Black Diamond Minus White X) as it represents windows or panes, which fits nicely with Instant Diffs' nature as a dialog window with content.
That looks amazing, and I really like your design process! I was wary about making the lettering too blatant, and having a very abstract logo can indeed work well, especially in your case where the colors also help convey the concept. I'll look at some Unicode symbols that can work well as inspiration for Twinkle (correct me if I'm wrong, but all Unicode symbols can be encoded in UTF-8, right?) Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:43, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The thing is, most of the uses of the logo are outside of the script (like topicons, userboxes, information pages, ...), so they can't be customized on the reader side, and having the person adding each logo choose which one to use would make it confusing for the reader. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 16:03, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Third proposal by Chaotic EnbyAfter working on it for a few days, here's another design! This one is inspired by the character U+2748❈HEAVY SPARKLE, with the sides being shaped like lightbulbs pointing in all directions. Twinkle is very much a multi-purpose tool, and it would've been hard to point to a single main "task" it does like Instant Diffs, so this abstract metaphor works well!
One issue I've run into is that Twinkle doesn't have much of a color palette. While I'm thinking of working on bringing it more in line with Codex, I had to take a few artistic liberties for now. I really liked the idea of a blue sparkle (O-type, or Wolf-Rayet stars), although I didn't want to go with the obvious choice of yellow lightbulbs to not look too much like Instant Diffs. I went for a purple gradient (inspired by plasma lamps and novae such as GK Persei), which adds a modern touch to it. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:09, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think I'd like it better, as I state below, if it had a bit of an homage to the current logo - perhaps yellow light bulbs and a red center, or vice versa. Somehow incorporating the color scheme from the policeman. ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs16:31, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Am I the only one, thinking that this one looks a little weird? It looks to me like if there's a star blade with boxing gloves shooting out. It's not representing the unicode spark character, it's inspired from. While I don't actually have any issues with this(I only said what I thought when I first looked at it.), I'd opt for a wordmark like icon as used for Ultraviolet. The sparkle icon can be used in it(for the 🔴 on top), with another icon for tool (eg:-🔧)(for the vertical bar). (Don't take my words too seriously!!)codelivid17:16, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I haven't been editing long enough to have nostalgic feelings for the cop, but I sympathize with editors who do. With logo changes to internal tools, it really does just come down to personal preference in the end, so I don't really see the logic in weighing one !vote over another. That being said, I don't feel very strongly that the logo should be changed, but if it is to be changed, it makes sense to pay homage to the original. In short: I'm neutral towards changing the logo, but I support version 4 if it happens. Chess enjoyer (talk) 04:45, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I change my mind: the new logo has grown on me, and I support it over the original. I still prefer version 4, but I don't mind if version 3 becomes the official logo. Chess enjoyer (talk) 03:01, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Seems fine to me; I easily support it over the status quo, and have no strong preference for it vs. the purple/blue version. Sdkbtalk06:59, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Chaotic Enby, version 4 seems very appealing than V3. I easily support it because red means endurance, engagement, decisiveness and courage. Ahri Boy (talk) 11:45, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I like the color scheme a lot, but I think that it could use a mascot of some sort. To avoid dealing with the human sociopolitical scenario, I propose that the new mascot should be a well-regarded animal. My first thoughts would be:
A dolphin, because dolphins are usually considered fun and intelligent
A crow, because crows are known for basic tool usage, and Twinkle is a tool
A golden retriever, because they act as excellent companions and double as hunting dogs (just like how Twinkle can hunt vandals)
Here to register an objection to the new logo. I like the policeman. And, furthermore, is a few people on a discussion the vast majority of Twinkle users don't know about really consensus? And is consensus decided in less than a day? ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs04:50, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The 17 editors in this thread have been discussing for more than a week, at the centralized forum for Twinkle discussions with more than 1,000 watchers. And WP:IJDLI is not an objection. Sdkbtalk04:54, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The new logo was posted 15 hours ago, not one week. I'm indifferent to "liking it", but to say more than a week when changes have already started is disingenuous. Happy Editing -- IAmChaos05:30, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough; I might have waited a little longer. But the logo was the iterative result of the workshopping that began more than a week ago, not a tabula rasa design. And 8-0 is enough of a prevailing consensus that I think it's rather hard to fault Chaotic Enby for acting. Sdkbtalk05:45, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think "I just don't like it" is an acceptable argument when it comes to visual changes, such as logos and skins. I think the spirit behind WP:IJDLI is more for making folks make policy-based arguments in deletion discussions. –Novem Linguae (talk) 06:25, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I started off this discussion with specific reasons that made the old logo unsuitable, so I would expect specific rebuttals to those points from anyone defending it. Talking about specifics of design requires building up a bit of a new vocabulary, so I'm sympathetic when people don't arrive with that off the bat. But requiring it to give !votes weight is the only way to even try to distinguish between those that come only from a place of "this is new and I don't like change" (see my comment below) and those that come from a more legitimate place. Sdkbtalk15:17, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Darth Stabro I fear that your objection is going to mean this process grinds to a halt and the logo will never change. One of the reasons I hate Wikipedia consensus making, when a single person can derail a discussion that users have put work into. I like the new logo suggestion, and I feel that should have equal weighting. What could we do to flip your objection to a support, or at the minimum a "I don't care"? qcne(talk)12:08, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Qcne, Sdkb, and Novem Linguae: I think the main reason I don't like the new logo aesthetically is nostalgia, to be sure - like many people here, I've been using Twinkle for a long time. If some sort of update was done, I'd like something that did some homage to the old logo, even if just by a matching color scheme, incorporation of the policeman's star or smile, etc. That said, if a greater consensus was found for the already-proposed new logo, I'd live with that. But I don't think eight people out of the thousands who use Twinkle is enough consensus for a change, especially on such short discussion. Some way of notifying regular users, who might not necessarily have WT:TWINKLE on their watchlist, would be good. I only saw the discussion when the template I created, {{Twinkle topicon}}, was modified. ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs14:52, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This page has 1,194 watchers, so that's good. This page is a pretty good megaphone. But yeah, point taken about keeping this open longer. Let's see where consensus is in a few days. –Novem Linguae (talk) 14:59, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your candor in acknowledging the role of nostalgia. To add on to qcne's point, though, design discussions are particularly hard to achieve in a consensus system because most people naturally like what they're used to, and that causes some level of built-in opposition. The same thing happened with Vector 2022. I wish that we could have some sort of rule with something like, before !voting in a design discussion, try out the new design for a week and see if it grows on you. Sdkbtalk15:09, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nostalgia is powerful, I'll give you that. Also, it seems like the policeman had meaning (at least at one point). One of the things I hate in the world right now is the growing sense of everything having to fit minimalism. The newest proposal is just a unicode character? I can't tell what a tool is like with just 4 blobs. UV isn't exactly descriptive as a logo, but it matches the name. The policeman is very fitting for antivandalism. I'm looking at my topicons right now; the WP:RE logo is very clear, a broom for cleaning and #R for redirect syntax; the mentor logo has a question and response. Changing from a recognizable logo to a random blob with less than a day's warning feels abrupt. at least the second proposal has a T and a W. If this is a !vote, which I know it's not, that's what I'm voting for. Happy Editing -- IAmChaos17:14, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The policeman is very fitting for antivandalism. It is, but there's a lot more to twinkle than that. The policeman never made sense to me since I use it for WP:PROD // deletions, which is more janitor than cop. I have no desire for authority lol. I like the idea to keep the colors though, the red/yellow has good contrast and ties whatever comes out of this back to the officer. ~ Argenti Aertheri(Chat?)23:22, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, I'm an oldie, I understand nostalgia, and I still use Twinkle for anti-vandalism among other tasks; but I also sympathise with the growing trend towards anti-police sentiment. I'd like to see a logo that minimises or completely removes the cop association while bringing back the "twinkle" element. To me, using Twinkle feels more like applying "magic pixie dust" (a bit of cleanup here, a bit of tagging there) than policing. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 00:59, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As someone who just arrived, I support the new logo for all the reasons Sdkb points out. I personally like v3 but am happy with v4 (or really most things which are not white male cops). HouseBlaster (talk • he/they)21:42, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I always thought the policeman mascot was literally called “Twinkle” because it’s a funny ironically cutesy name for a big burly dude. Dronebogus (talk) 09:55, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I support CE V3 aka the current one. The colors are nice, the shape is distinctive (even if it’s more “flower” than “sparkle” to me), it’s timeless (unlike the early 2000s vector clipart vibes of the classic logo) and the neutral software logo vibe is better for a general maintenance tool than “I’m an angry cop who’s gonna kick your ass, vandal” which I guess was the message behind the first logo. --Dronebogus (talk) 10:05, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I oppose any changes, the logo carried history and was just fine. No convincing arguments here. Claiming a white police officer conveys racism is just disgusting as well and it's just a fact that most WP editors, alike policemen, are white males. This should've been decided with an RfC. ~2026-97303 (talk) 16:52, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Start an RFC once we've got an alternative to present then? No one is going to vote to keep something that was clearly designed 20 years ago though, so if you want to keep him you should probably try making a version that isn't littered with gradients. ~ Argenti Aertheri(Chat?)20:14, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
People are quite passionate about logos, aren't they! Audacity is getting a new logo with v4 and people are up in arms about it too! And does anyone remember MediaWiki's old sunflower logo that we used for 18 years? People have strong attachments to logos, even if they can't really explain why. I have no strong opinion about the old and new Twinkle logos myself (even though the policeman does bring back memories of my high school self); the old logo is more akin to Twinkle's history as a tool for patrollers while the new logo is more of a literal "twinkle". WP:IJDLI is an argument you're going to hear a lot with any logo change, simply because people are so passionately and emotionally attached to logos (it's a human thing; we like symbols we can fly over our heads), but one that you'll start to hear less and less as everyone gets used to (or begrudgingly accepts) the new logo, and more practical matters take hold. While I'm here, from a cursory glance, it looks like the logo has only been discussed twice on this talk page: once in 2015 over whether Twinkle was strictly an anti-vandalism tool or a "Swiss army knife", and more recently in September over the Twinkle policeman icon being used by trolls on other sites. "Meh" at the second, but I do agree that Twinkle has long evolved from its early days as a patroller's companion and more towards a general "Swiss army knife" that does a whole bunch of useful things. —k6ka🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 13:50, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Could you please add to / extend the "Page > Subpages" feature so it lists both talk and non-talk subpages, regardless from which side it gets triggered? Paradoctor (talk) 12:34, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For {{R from other language}} and for {{R avoided double redirect}}, when selected Twinkle will provide a box to fill in the parameter (or parameters, for alt lang). Could we get the same option for {{R from sort name}}, which is supposed to pass two parameters? {{{1}}} being the first letter of the redirect, and {{{2}}} being the first letter of the target. Happy Editing -- IAmChaos21:06, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I came across Special:Diff/1328515844 and noticed that a) there was an excessively long edit summary, likely caused by b) a Twinkle tag. Does TW have the ability to close merge discussions and make the associated edits with removal etc? I've never seen that before. If that is the case, can I request that we remove the full edit from the edit summary? Primefac (talk) 11:58, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think that editor might have just used the TW -> Tag feature, unticked {{Merge from}}, then typed or copy pasted a long reason in the "reason" box (which then shows up as the edit summary). –Novem Linguae (talk) 12:30, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I recently reverted edits on a page using Twinkle. Only afterward did I see that there was CTOP 1RR restriction on the page. The notice appears in the normal editing window, but not when doing edits with Twinkle. There should be some alert if using Twinkle to revert edits on pages (or for other edits to which it may apply) if any such sanctions are present to avoid accidental violations of 1RR restrictions. TornadoLGS (talk) 23:23, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The X3 criterion was rescinded in November, so these initially seemed to qualify. However, on further review, the documentation of these pages says: Any breaking changes to this template, including moving it or nominating it for deletion, must be communicated in advance to Twinkle's users and maintainers at Wikipedia talk:Twinkle.
I see that the Twinkle options still allow a page to be tagged for speedy deletion via X3. Can this be sorted out so the above two templates can be deleted? – Epicgenius (talk) 18:36, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
If {{db-gs}} is selected as a rationale for a {{db-multiple}} CSD nomination, Twinkle instead places the {{db-banned}} rationale (e.g. Special:Diff/1332331953). The intended is correctly recorded in the user's CSD log.
Is the list editable somewhere? It's currently rather confused, and confusing, and could do with being copy-edited. For example, one entry begins "Wikipedia:" but the others do not; and several begin "The".
I'm happy to do the grunt work, if you can tell me where.
was archived unanswered. Since then, the most recent additions are "Can", "Ee" and "Ps".
This might be a dumb question, but... why? BLAR just involves editing the page, Ctrl+A, then typing in #REDIRECT [target]. Doesn't seem like it would save all that much time and effort to use TW for this. Primefac (talk) 10:28, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Because that way, it can also inform the top contributors of the page that a BLAR action is being made on the page. Manual BLAR-ers might skip that step. Kingsacrificer (talk) 18:50, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Adding to this that WP:CT/KURD also isn't adding correctly (see [1]). I've been curious why I've seen multiple talk pages with notices like this, where they state, "No contentious topic code has been specified", and thought it may be user error. Doesn't seem like it, though. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:09, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not a big fan of this one. If you manage to get a problematically long user talk page you are likely an established user and is unlikely to be happy about a templated warning that assumes you are a newbie. Trialpears (talk) 11:05, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Just because someone's an "established user" doesn't mean they can't be reminded about issues that affect others, regardless of their standing. It's also entirely possible that the issue has never been brought up before, or that they aren't aware it's an issue. TM:Please archive exists as a short reminder, consider that instead if you will. HKLionelTALK11:19, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
To give my opinion on the merits of this request, I would say that templates in the Twinkle system should be commonly-used. I am currently seeing ~230 uses in the user talk space (and less than 50 of the shorter variant). Even counting stuff that might have been deleted, I'm not sure it's going to be used enough to merit making it a default template in Twinkle. Primefac (talk) 12:19, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I like {{please archive}} significantly more since it is a lot less confrontational. I also find the concern raised by Primefac convincing although I believe it would be used significantly more often if in twinkle. Adding it in your own install should be sufficient imo. Trialpears (talk) 12:29, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to make an objective criteria for adding a template to Twinkle. The criteria should be if a template has at least X number of uses, because this signals popularity/usefulness in an objective way. This would apply to user warnings, maintenance tags, and maybe to some other stuff that I am forgetting. I was thinking 25, but in the section above folks were saying even 230 wasn't enough. What are our thoughts on the exact number? Thanks. –Novem Linguae (talk) 15:45, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
No comment on the specific number, but I'd just like to point out that most templates of this nature probably get their usage from Twinkle itself, so if it's added and Twinkle users find them useful/there are enough use cases that they can be applied to, usage would naturally rise. Some Twinkle users, including myself, sometimes scroll through the menu to see what templates can address the issues at hand, so we aren't really aware of templates not listed there, nor would we really go out of our way to search for one, unless—like me in the above section—we are aware of the specific issue. HKLionelTALK17:41, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe like 5 per month on average? Doesn't seem overly onerous for an actually widely useful template even if it isn't in twinkle default and makes it easier for new templates to be added to twinkle. Given how easy it is to add your own templates I don't feel like it's necessary to be more permissive than this. Trialpears (talk) 18:13, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Uses divided by age of template isn't hard to do. Usage might have changed significantly so that's a flaw with that methodology but a template racking up a hundred uses over a decade or two does not mean it's highly used either. Ultimately I think we will have to be a bit subjective here. Trialpears (talk) 11:26, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I think it should be based on user request. If a single person thinks a template should be added, they can do it themselves. If multiple people (maybe... 5?) agree that it's an overlooked template, we can add it. That avoids the "it's not used" issue and demonstrates that it will actually be used by folk. Primefac (talk) 20:09, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The "Shared IP" option in Twinkle has been removed per #Delete "Shared IP" module? and #2260. This module was only used 4 times over the last 30 days, by 2 distinct users – which isn't the expected level of usage for a Twinkle component.
Twinkle's UI has been migrated to no longer rely on jQuery UI, which is deprecated. This is largely an internal change and doesn't have visible effects. The only notable difference is that dialogs can be resized only from the bottom-right corner (earlier they could be resized from any corner or edge).
Hi @SD0001: I don't know if this is connected (or whether it's a Twinkle issue at all, for that matter) but the submit button on the Twinkle dialog box used to be focused on load (ie. it had the 'focus ring' around it), which meant that when eg. welcoming a user you could just select that option from the menu and hit return. For the past couple of days this is no longer the case, and you now need to explicitly click on the submit button. I realise this is a tiny thing in the bigger scheme of things, but if it's a very easy fix, it would save an old dog like yours truly having to learn new tricks. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:43, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It's actually the first input in the form that was focused on load. Now, the dialog as a whole is getting focused. I restored the earlier behaviour (should be live in a few minutes). As long as any form element is in focus, hitting return will submit the form. – SD0001 (talk) 18:52, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
When starting an AfD, I have to scroll through a long list in a narrow window to choose deletion sorting categories. WP:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Compact is much more helpful in choosing categories, and it should be linked to in the Twinkle menu. If not, then a link to the WikiProject at least please. Thanks, HKLionelTALK19:24, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Having a list helps make connections to DELSORT lists that wouldn't have been made otherwise. Not every search term turns up results, and synonyms can complicate things. It'd also be more user-friendly for newcomers and people who are inexperienced regarding AfD. HKLionelTALK21:11, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It used to be the case that reporting a sockpuppet through Twinkle would include a tickbox for requesting a checkuser, but I'm not seeing that box any more. Was it removed deliberately? Belbury (talk) 14:04, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Belbury Yes, the SPI template no longer has an option for the filer to request CU. New cases are now set to "New". Clerks/admins can request CU on a case if needed, while cases that don't need CU are set to "Open". Toadspike[Talk]14:36, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a setting that I'm missing to disable automatically subscribing to WP:AIV when I report a user via ARV? I know that this was a known issue on Wikimedia's end, but to my (not terribly tech-savvy) understanding, that issue was resolved quite a while ago[2], and the flood of notifications that comes in when I forget to manually unsubscribe is quite obnoxious. ᴸᵃᶠᶠʸTaffer💬(they/she)17:59, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@LaffyTaffer If you turn off "Automatically subscribe to topics" in your settings, it will fix this problem. You will, however, no longer be automatically subscribed to talk page topics you comment on. I found the tradeoff to be worth it, though, and have turned this feature off. Toadspike[Talk]23:27, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I was aware of that, yeah. I personally did not find the tradeoff to be worth it, I already forget to subscribe to topics enough with things like Wikilove messages. Thank you for the reminder all the same, and thanks to @SD0001 for opening a ticket(?) ᴸᵃᶠᶠʸTaffer💬(they/she)23:38, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. Auto-subscribe is now disabled for AIV, SPI, and AN3. It was already disabled for XFD listings. Let me know if there are other places where it's a problem. – SD0001 (talk) 06:02, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 13:52, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 16:06, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
.svg){kind=logo}
Template:Reduce to stub has been nominated for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 10:04, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
The redirect Help:FRIENDLY has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 January 3 § Help:FRIENDLY until a consensus is reached. Primefac (talk) 20:47, 3 January 2026 (UTC)
Fixed. Auto-subscribe is now disabled for AIV, SPI, and AN3. It was already disabled for XFD listings. Let me know if there are other places where it's a problem. – SD0001 (talk) 06:02, 28 February 2026 (UTC)