Template talk:Submit an edit request

Template:Submit an edit request is permanently protected from editing because it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit protected}} to notify an administrator to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes or categories. Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. Functionality of the template can be checked using test cases.

To help centralise discussions and keep related topics together, all talk subpages of this template and Module talk:Submit an edit request redirect here.

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

Please replace the contents of the page with the following:

{{Clickable button 2|url={{Submit an edit request/core|type={{{type|}}}}}|Submit an edit request|class=mw-ui-progressive}}<noinclude>
{{documentation}}
</noinclude>

This avoids use of unnecessary forms and simplifies the code.

Jackmcbarn (talk) 22:36, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jackmcbarn, I've done what you wanted. Please check the results and ping me if I made a mistake, or if it's had results that you didn't expect. Nyttend (talk) 13:42, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request to Template:Submit an edit request/link has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the Wiki article on Bastian Schweinsteiger, the price of the move to United is mentioned as 14.4 Million GBP and has no source for the price as such. I read in an ESPN FC article (http://www.espnfc.com.co/club/bayern-munich/132/blog/post/2521623/bayern-reasons-for-selling-schweinsteiger-to-man-united) that the price is closer to 15 Million Euro or about 11 Million GBP.

Can you please change this? 103.251.108.4 (talk) 09:42, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for discussing the {{Submit an edit request}} template. I have moved your request to the article's discussion page, at Talk:Bastian Schweinsteiger. - Evad37 [talk] 10:37, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request to Template:Submit an edit request/link has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

MCM Modern Creation Munich should be Modern Creation München, this is what the acronym really stands for. The proof is on this page ^[1]

50.143.14.141 (talk) 23:26, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the template {{Submit an edit request}}. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. Jackmcbarn (talk) 23:46, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

plz improve the artical of dhudhi cast with ful detail and history 8.37.224.20 (talk) 11:21, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the template {{Submit an edit request}}. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:29, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request to The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity#References/link has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I've found two valid sources for reference #4: "Spash, C. L. (2011) Terrible economics, ecosystems and banking. Environmental Values 20(2): 141-145."

These sources are the publisher's website of the free html version of said article, containing a link to a website providing the free pdf version for it as well^[1] and the website itself hosting the free pdf version of the article given above.^[2] The website providing the pdf unfortunately doesn't offer a static link, which could just be copied and pasted into the source text of the criticism of TEEB section, but a dynamic link instead, which changes everytime you retreive the pdf document from the hosting website.

Furthermore, I would also like to suggest that in terms of consistency, the current given Format of reference #4:
"Spash, C. L. (2011) Terrible economics, ecosystems and banking. Environmental Values 20(2): 141-145."
corresponds to the formatting of reference #3:
"Spash, C.L. 2008. How much is that ecosystem in the window? The one with the bio-diverse trail. Environmental Values, vol. 17, no. 2, 259-284"
Thus the new formatting for reference #4 would result in:
"Spash, C. L. 2011. Terrible economics, ecosystems and banking. Environmental Values, vol. 20, no. 2, 141-145".
(I've tried to highlight the corresponding changes that I've made by writing in bold and italic combined.) Thmshb (talk) 16:12, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the template {{Submit an edit request}}. If possible, please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. If you cannot edit the article's talk page, you can instead make your request at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Current requests for edits to a protected page. Qed237 (talk) 16:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request to Template:Submit an edit request/preload has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

So this template contains the following line when preloaded: {{subst:void|State UNAMBIGUOUSLY your suggested changes, preferably in a "change X to Y" format. Other editors need to know what to add or remove. Blank edit requests will be declined.}} I am almost certain that the multitude of blank edit requests we see come through (1 2 3 4 just today but there are many more) is from users putting their request within the {{void}} parameter of the edit request. So I believe changing to a coded comment that is maintained after submission will help solve the problem.

<includeonly>{{$1|$2|answered=no}}</includeonly>
{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>trim|
<!-- State UNAMBIGUOUSLY your suggested changes below this line, preferably in a "change X to Y" format. Other editors need to know what to add or remove. Blank edit requests will be declined. -->



{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>^|Write your request ABOVE this line and do not remove the tildes and curly brackets below.
}}}} ~~<noinclude />~~

– Nihlus (talk) 05:02, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Nihlus:  Done – good call.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ<  08:12, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@SMcCandlish: Can we change the second void {{^}} to a comment as well? I just tested out {{trim}} and it takes the comments out like a void would, but this would provide better legibility when posting.

<includeonly>{{$1|$2|answered=no}}</includeonly>
{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>trim|
<!-- State UNAMBIGUOUSLY your suggested changes below this line, preferably in a "change X to Y" format. Other editors need to know what to add or remove. Blank edit requests will be declined. -->



<!-- Write your request ABOVE this line and do not remove the tildes and curly brackets below. -->
}} ~~<noinclude />~~

Thanks. Nihlus 02:25, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Nihlus:  Done.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ<  03:15, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@SMcCandlish and Nihlus: But, under normal circumstances, the comments are useless after the page is saved, which is precisely the reason I changed this to use {{void}}. Putting the request in comments is thus adding unnecessary clutter to countless talk pages to solve just another case of failing to follow instructions. This is just another way to file a malformed edit request, by disobeying the words "below this line", which does not require the template to be recoded for. {{repeat|p|3}}ery (talk) 22:28, 7 November 2017 (UTC) (edited 23:03, 7 November 2017 (UTC))[reply]

@Pppery: There are still improvements that need to be made in order to reduce the empty requests, but this seemingly has helped a bit. I haven't had the time to sit down and really come up with an alternative that doesn't use the void template or comments. Nihlus 22:34, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I just realised that {{subst:trim}} strips HTML comments, which makes no sense at all to me and kind of moots my point. But still, this makes this request kind of self-contradictory, and it still makes no sense to change templates to rely on obscure features of other templates when less obscure methods exist for the same functionality. {{repeat|p|3}}ery (talk) 23:02, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppery: I don't understand what the issue is. Nihlus 23:47, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Answer: me not realizing that {{trim}} counterintuitively strips HTML comments and then saying that because that functionality is counterintuitive and thus should not be used in a template, while not understanding why comment syntax should be better. {{repeat|p|3}}ery (talk) 00:23, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Practical benefit trumps philosophical theory. If Nihlus is reporting a reduction in the problem, and it's causing no fallout harm, then we all win.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ<  10:19, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

^[1]

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

Genuineeffect (talk) 09:28, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

The page for tech n9ne needs to be updated. He died 3 days ago by suicide. https://www.boston25news.com/amp/news/trending-now/rapper-tech-9s-cause-of-death-ruled-a-suicide-coroner-says/954022436 There is a link to the news story. 67.2.175.231 (talk) 23:35, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That is Tech 9, aka Akeem Mickens, for whom we do not appear to have an article, who is different than Tech N9ne aka Aaron Dontez Yates. In the future, though, these sort of requests should be made on the talk page of the article in question. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:28, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

For Module:Submit an edit request, Please replace with the current version of the sandbox (diff). - this takes advantage of Special:NewSection, a new special page, to reduce the complexity of the mw.uri.fullUrl call by eliminating an argument. There isn't any difference in the target of the resultant link. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 04:15, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Izno (talk) 13:45, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Reverted @DannyS712: Apparently Special:NewSection doesn't correctly handle array parameters. This edit caused T231088 to happen, and reverting fixed it. Anomie⚔ 15:05, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yay, found a bug (?)! --Izno (talk) 15:31, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request to Template:Submit an edit request/preload has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I think we should prevent those code blocks from forming when users write their request outside of the {{trim}} section (example of such a code block above). We could either:

1. Diff – Add a single newline before the signature.
2. Diff (invisible) – Add a zero-width space (&#8203;) after the closing curly braces.

– Thjarkur (talk) 16:24, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure we're not supposed to use invisible white space characters; AWB and bots remove them, which may break transclusions of this template. Can you put in the &#8203; instead? – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:35, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, probably too much of a hack. Showing the char code would be confusing. Option one would still work. – Thjarkur (talk) 16:20, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And I deliberately removed the newline back in 2016. I believe this request is addressing a non-problem, as the example edit request is blank and therefore should have been removed, rendering it's formatting irrelevant.  Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit template-protected}} template. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:12, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

– Thjarkur (talk) 19:13, 28 July 2020 (UTC) It's not really a "problem", but it does look strange. Happens both with blank requests and when people write actual requests outside of the trim box.[reply]

Simply, I believe the impact of adding an unnecessary newline before the signature to be greater than causing already malformed edit requests to be slightly less malformed. I would have been willing to implement the "zero-width space" variation, but Jonesey95 has opposed that, so there's no consensus for it either. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:50, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Replace Module:Submit an edit request with Module:Submit an edit request/sandbox (diff showing changes). The sandbox changes, coded by Pppery (thank you!) following discussion at Wikipedia talk:Edit requests#Unique edit request section headers, adds a suffix like "(2)", "(3)", etc., to duplicate edit request headers in order to distinguish them. On busy semi-protected pages, multiple edit requests will commonly be made on the same day, which will have identical headers, making them difficult to link to later (particulary when the edit requests are repetitive and editors want to respond by referring to previously-processed requests). You can see for example at Talk:Killing of George Floyd/Archive index how many semi-protected edit request threads have the same title. Pppery's upgrade fixes this by adding "(2)", "(3)", etc., to distinguish the headers. You can see an example of this in action at Pppery's test at X10. Thanks in advance! Lev!vich 03:12, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Module:Submit an edit request/config also needs to be updated from Module:Submit an edit request/config/sandbox for this to work (and Module:Submit an edit request should not call the sandbox version of the /config subpage). * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:17, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Jackmcbarn (talk) 03:38, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Jackmcbarn! Lev!vich 04:09, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

There appears to be a problem with Module:Submit an edit request on line 64, but I don’t know what the problem is. It appears in MediaWiki:Titleblacklist-forbidden-edit on mobile view, try creating the page A;; on mobile view with some content and then try to submit the edit request is where the problem comes. 54nd60x (talk) 06:09, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please change talkPageName to talkPageTitle to resolve the error. 54nd60x (talk) 13:48, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@54nd60x: What change specifically are you suggesting? Can you make it in the sandbox first? — The Earwig (talk) 07:19, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Earwig: The Change I want to make should be made on line 64. 54nd60x (talk) 09:12, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@54nd60x: This request does not make sense to me; how will renaming the variable change anything? talkPageName is a fine name and talkPageTitle is the correct attribute per the docs. — The Earwig (talk) 23:43, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Earwig: Renaming the variable will fix the MediaWiki:Titleblacklist-forbidden-edit message on mobile view when attempting to create such pages. Currently there's an error on line 64. You can try logging out and clicking on Special:EditPage/A;; in mobile view to see. 54nd60x (talk) 13:27, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@54nd60x: I'm not able to reproduce the error. I've tried using a non-admin alt account in mobile view, but I don't see anything abnormal. Can you clearly explain why you believe this variable name is the cause of the problem? — The Earwig (talk) 00:38, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Earwig: I’m not too sure, but the below screenshot I took may help. 54nd60x (talk) 00:49, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@54nd60x: Ah, perfect. You correctly identified the location of the error but not the fix. I think this should do the trick. Can you try again? It should say "talk page" but point you to WP:RFPP; this isn't ideal but at least it's not an error. — The Earwig (talk) 01:34, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Earwig: Works now, thanks! 54nd60x (talk) 01:39, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request to Module:Submit an edit request, Template:Protected page text/semi, Template:Protected page text/extendedconfirmed, Template:Protected page text/template and Template:Protected page text/full has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

To set up for Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Possible new tool/technique/procedure, please:

1. Copy from Module:Submit an edit request/sandbox to Module:Submit an edit request
2. Copy from Template:Protected page text/semi/sandbox to Template:Protected page text/semi
3. Copy from Template:Protected page text/extendedconfirmed/sandbox to Template:Protected page text/extendedconfirmed
4. Copy from Template:Protected page text/template/sandbox to Template:Protected page text/template
5. Copy from Template:Protected page text/full/sandbox to Template:Protected page text/full

* Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:37, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(...Sound of Crickets...) --Guy Macon (talk) 05:07, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(...Chirp...) --Guy Macon (talk) 06:07, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(...Chirp...) --Guy Macon (talk) 21:13, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Guy Macon: Constant bumping here isn't going to get it done and just adds noise for no observable reason. Please don't. (I'll review the edit request.) Izno (talk) 05:22, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppery: A couple comments, neither particularly blocking, before I'd implement:

1. A tracking/maintenance category for pages with disabled auto edit requests would be nice. I'm not totally into the mechanism of what's going on here but the mention of substing things at AN is why this is a 'would be nice'. (If not a category in context of substing, either one of the Z templates or a hidden comment if the module. Pretty sure a category will do nicely given modules are rarely substed.)
2. I tend toward having the implementations in the sandboxes check for equivalence (ifeq) rather than existence (if).

Otherwise consensus and implementation looks fine to me. Izno (talk) 05:29, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

1. Such tracking will already exist via Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Manual edit requests, so I don't think it is necessary to add it separately ({{manual edit requests}} is unsubstified; the reason I suggested substing it at AN was because it needs to take some parameters from the parent template, and I figured it would be easier and less fragile to have subst produce the desired wikitext rather than forcing every use to add it manually).
2. Any particular reason why you prefer equality checking to existence checking? I'm not strongly against it, just don't see why it matters

* Pppery * _{it has begun...} 13:51, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppery: Wlh is fine, that works for me. Equality check helps keep stray any-text from turning this on--I think we should endeavor to keep the use of manual fairly limited and the stray any-text doesn't keep us on that path. {{yesno}} would be fine with me. Izno (talk) 16:02, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Izno: I've switched the sandboxes to {{yesno}}. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:18, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Izno (talk) 21:42, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So, are we ready to test this at Talk:Minecraft and see if it causes any issues? that page would be a good test because right now we have a low volume of edit requests but we get a flood of them every time there is a major update. --Guy Macon (talk) 04:05, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In terms of technical ability, yes, but there's some opposition to the entire idea over at AN that I would prefer to resolve first before going ahead. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:05, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

When I click View Source at Module:Message box and then click "Submit an edit request", the link takes me to Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors instead of generating an edit request on the relevant talk page. Is this an error with this template/module, or somewhere else? I have Template Editor permissions but not Admin permissions. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:40, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's a deliberate feature that edit requests to pages transcluded on the Main Page get sent to Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors (intended for pages like Template:In the news/Template:Did you know). Perhaps it would make sense to hard-code those main page content templates instead of relying on transclusion and inadvertently picking up main page infrastructure templates. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:18, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request to Module:Submit an edit request and Module:Submit an edit request/config has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

To fix the above bug (using the solution I wrote above), please copy code from Module:Submit an edit request/sandbox to Module:Submit an edit request and Module:Submit an edit request/config/sandbox to Module:Submit an edit request/config * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:30, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Izno (talk) 16:44, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please copy from Module:Submit an edit request/sandbox to Module:Submit an edit request (except for the reference to the sandbox of the /config submodule) and Module:Submit an edit request/config/sandbox to Module:Submit an edit request/config to implement Wikipedia talk:Requests for page protection#Technical roadmap * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:27, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, thank you very much, Pppery. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:05, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I noticed one thing. Pppery, the heading level for a WP:RFPP request should probably be 3, not 2. You may like to implement a check for this. Nevertheless, I'm very happy to see that it works. Thank you! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:23, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ToBeFree: OK, I've fixed the header levels in the sandbox, which was a pain to do. To implement the fix, please copy from Module:Submit an edit request/sandbox to Module:Submit an edit request (again excluding the /sandbox reference), and Special:PermaLink/1033974660 to Template:Submit_an_edit_request/preload. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:36, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Using a third preload-parameter that is empty for normal edit requests – okay, that's a cool solution. Done, thank you very much again, Pppery! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 11:54, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ToBeFree: Would you mind reverting this series of edits (going back to Special:PermaLink/1027191154)? My original idea of using edit request templates at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Edit seems to have proven impractical and been piecemeal reverted in various ways (the original change to Template:Protected page text to not include this button for pages with protected talk pages, Special:Diff/1034698994/033936468 to make the add a request button system not use those templates, etc.), and it's now caused yet another mess at Module talk:Protected edit request#"Error: Protected edit requests can only be made on the talk page." error, so it seems wise to back out entirely. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:36, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, yeah. Hm.  Done; are there additional reverts needed in other places? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:00, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted the edit to Template:Submit an edit request/preload associated with this system, and nothing else needs reverting. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:06, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I recently switched the WP:RPP raise protection & lower protection workflows to use JavaScript forms (with the existing preload-based forms as fallbacks). I'd like to do the same here. Thoughts? (The implementation would be very straightforward and similar to the two forms already mentioned.) Enterprisey (talk!) 07:41, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like a good idea. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:36, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please

1. apply Special:Diff/1039915417/1041076703 to Module:Submit an edit request
2. remove line ['main-page'] = 'Main Page', and accompanying comment from Module:Submit an edit request/config

This will remove the unnecessary isTranscludedOnMainPage check, which is overridden by the table cfg['main-page-content']. —⁠andrybak (talk) 12:25, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I hope this works as intended — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:34, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add "submit-an-edit-request-link" as classes to both the edit request button and edit request link. The rationale here is to make the button more easily accessible to computers and computer code. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 22:23, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. Please link to a consensus discussion resulting in a decision to add this proposed class. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:47, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonesey95 This class does absolutely nothing except make it easier for computer code like JQuery to pull out all of the "submit an edit request" links. There is no styling or anything of that sort (like "mw-headline" or "mw-collapsible") that would break this template. I'd figure this is something that would be uncontroversial. I could have named the proposed class "submit-an-edit-request-link-on-wheels" and it would not have made a difference in the output. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 16:04, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Description of suggested change: Merge Special:Diff/1209886670, should fix the error. Doing a static analysis of the code, it appears all of the parameters are still the same in the Special:Diff/1209820386 version, just that the name has changed from luaMain to main. However only way to find out I guess, and MediaWiki:Protectedpagetext is currently... broken. Well, the submit an edit request part is broken. Sagflaps (talk) 00:53, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Izno (talk) 01:52, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]