User talk:SD0001

Hi! Thank you so much for the very useful script. Are you aware of this discussion on updating the merging templates in light of the recent RfC to merge the PAM process to AfD? I suspect that the changes will break the script so I wanted to give you a heads up. Some of the templates are up at TfD now for deprecation, see here. There's also a conversation here on updating twinkle for the same reason. Do you have the capacity to update the script, or should we try and organize other editors to fork and update it with the changed templates? ScrubbedFalcon (talk) 22:40, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Let me know when the discussions are nearing closure and there's clarity on precisely what's changing to what. – SD0001 (talk) 05:35, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

I can only see a couple of things that will make your script not work as intended. These already have consensus and are currently being implemented into Twinkle, so they should be set in stone (especially the first one):

• You should change the default status of this box, it should be unchecked by default instead of checked: Add {{merged-from}} to talk page of target page (you can read the reason for why at H:M#Optional steps step 6b)
  It should also probably be renamed to help the user understand when it should not be ticked. I'd suggest renaming it to "Add {{merged-from}} to talk page of target page (do not enable this if the merge was discussed at AfD)"
  (If you want to do a little bit of coding, you could make these other improvements to the code, but the one above should suffice)
• All new pages with consensus to merge will be tagged in a format similar to {{Merge from |1=SourcePage |target=TargetPage |afd=NominationName |date =April 2026}}. Make sure this works with the option Remove merge tag from target page (if it exists).

I'd be nice if these could be implemented right away to help wit the transition :) FaviFake (talk) 07:49, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Done in Special:Diff/1347394666. I added a tooltip instead of extending the label. – SD0001 (talk) 13:07, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Quick facts Five years! ...

Precious

Five years!

Close

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:18, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi! Which Quarry query do you use to find editwarring for Wikipedia:Database_reports/Potential_edit-warring_or_disruption? Thanks, Polygnotus (talk) 14:29, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

It's in the page source. – SD0001 (talk) 15:19, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! Polygnotus (talk) 15:21, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

I was bored so I made that Editwar thing at the bottom.

If PolygnotusBot only edits their own userspace (specifically User:PolygnotusBot/editwar and only runs once every 10 minutes or so (only editing when something has changed), do I need a BRFA?

I have tried to reduce API calls as much as possible using User:NovemBot/userlist.js (refreshed daily), I use exponential backoff, support maxlag, provide a useragent and use healthchecks.io. Polygnotus (talk) 08:11, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

As it only edits its own userspace, no BRFA is required. – SD0001 (talk) 09:07, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

The table updated by your bot (User:SDZeroBot) is inaccurate as it lists Menchi as inactive. Although their contributions says they haven't made an edit for over 2 years, they have in fact been recently deleting pages, as can be seen in their user logs.

Thus I suggest modifying your bot to also take into consideration any logged actions when determining if a user is inactive. — Isaac Oscar 10:38, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

The bot just runs whatever SQL query it is given via the {{database report}} template. You can check the page history to see who set up the query. – SD0001 (talk) 10:45, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Oh god, it's a massive SQL query... (which was created by @Cryptic?).

If they don't notice my ping, I guess I can try and work out how to fix it later (not that I've ever written an SQL query for Wikipedia before...) — Isaac Oscar 10:52, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

It's specifically documented right at the top that it doesn't look for logged actions. Those are always going to need manual inspection and human judgment - same reason why there are so many users who have never been administrators listed on WP:ADMINSTATS. —Cryptic 11:02, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply!

Sorry for wasting everyone's time here, I've slightly updated the documentation to hopefully make this clearer (but that probably still won't catch idiots like me that didn't bother to read it in the first place...)

It would of course be nice if this could be done with an SQL query, but I'll not waste more people's time by submitting an database feature request or something (I don't even have the faintest idea where to do so). — Isaac Oscar 11:11, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello. I recently discovered that the userbox listing my GA credits, which links to a Toolforge list, lacks all but one of the articles I have helped promote. I had my username changed from Saltymagnolia to Akaza last year, which might be the reason. This is the actual list of of my GA credits, and I'm wondering if it be possible to update the list.

Thanks. Akaza ^[talk] 21:51, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

There are two more under Akaza (usurped). Changing the signature in Special:Diff/1321626642 caused the bot to credit that GA to "Akaza (usurped)" because the account named "Akaza" as of 13:12, 1 August 2025 (UTC) was now "Akaza (usurped)". Same with SS D. M. Clemson (1903).

During renames, the bot is supposed to re-credit the GAs. As for why this didn't happen during Saltymagnolia -> Akaza rename, I'm not sure.

I have fixed these manually. – SD0001 (talk) 11:14, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

Category:Draft articles about the Americas has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mclay1 (talk) 08:16, 4 June 2026 (UTC)