Wikipedia talk:Ultraviolet

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Bug Report Feature Request

Going Ultraviolet

[edit]

Hello there! By now, you may have already noticed that RedWarn hasn't had any major updates since 16.1 (released on March 8, 2021), and we've only been sending out some minor patches and bugfixes since then. In that time, we've been hard at work developing a complete rewrite of the project since September 2020, and we've finally done enough work to be able to release a beta version of this rewrite soon.

Because of many different factors, including the rewrite having diverged so much from the original code, the team has decided to give this version of RedWarn a brand new name. We've decided to call it Ultraviolet; electromagnetic radiation found past the opposite side of red on the visible light spectrum. Releases of the userscript will eventually be available on user pages of 10nm — 10 nanometers being the smallest possible wavelength of ultraviolet light. We're still working on getting a user-friendly version of Ultraviolet available; we ask for your patience as we get closer to releasing more feature-filled builds of Ultraviolet.

Is this a new script or just a rebranded version of RedWarn?

In essence, Ultraviolet is a rewritten version of RedWarn. That said, most of the original code has been removed or replaced. Significant work has also been done to make the process of using the script smooth and universal, removing nearly all of the UI-related bugs experienced in the current version of RedWarn. In addition, we're also working on Safari support, mobile usability, internationalization (other languages), wiki-specific configurations, a dark mode, and a lot more features that make Ultraviolet just work out of the box.

What this means for RedWarn

For a while, we've been holding off on development of further versions of RedWarn in favor of the rewrite. Expanding on the current code is a feat that would take a significant amount of time, on par with just rewriting the script itself. For now, RedWarn will still be supported and given security updates and patches for minor bugs. Once Ultraviolet has been completed and integrates all the features of RedWarn, we will decommission RedWarn and ask users to switch to the new userscript.

What this means for you, as a user

Stick to RedWarn while we're still working on implementing all the features of RedWarn into Ultraviolet. Rest assured, we will still provide updates that prioritize user safety and security, so you can still use RedWarn without the fear of compromise. We highly recommend to anyone who does counter-vandalism patrol often to use only RedWarn for now in order to avoid any catastrophic bugs. We're still finishing up on making the script backwards-compatible with your existing RedWarn configuration, after that we'll begin providing beta versions of Ultraviolet, so that anyone who wishes to use Ultraviolet before it has caught up with RedWarn can do so.

You'll be able to keep on using RedWarn until we've made our first release version (i.e. 1.0) of Ultraviolet. After that, we will require you to switch to Ultraviolet from RedWarn, as we will be dropping support for RedWarn. Although this may be a bit of a bother, we ask for your patience in this eventual transition.

What else this means

We'll be moving away from the RedWarn name entirely in the coming months. The team believes it's important to move away from the name, as most of Ultraviolet has been built from scratch and holds little to no resemblance to RedWarn (at least in terms of the code), and due to some other reasons.

This is a big milestone for us as userscript developers, and we hope to have your full support. In case you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to ask us about them below. Thanks!

Written by Chlod, Berrely, Sennecaster, and Remagoxer. Published by Chlod (RW â€˘ say hi!) 19:39, 22 February 2022 (UTC).[reply]

@Chlod, is there any update on the progress of this? There's no rush, just curious. — Qwerfjkltalk 21:34, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, @Qwerfjkl! The developers are currently busy on a few things, me specifically being busy (in recent months) with Deputy, although now that the bulk of the starting work on that has wrapped up, I can start working on Ultraviolet again. In the meantime, we've been doing some background work that'll help us facilitate the move from GitLab.org to Wikimedia GitLab, and we're currently planning how to perform that migration within the near future. Next up on the list of major features up for implementation is a module for marking pages for speedy deletion, so that's on my list of things to research. Hope this answers your question! Chlod (UV â€˘ say hi!) 03:31, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Chlod, is UV is in full swing operation or still in the process of moving? ♒️ 98TIGERIUS 🐯 21:12, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's still moving but close to completion, I would advise to remain with redwarn as UV is still in beta and doesn't have all the features of redwarn fully implemented. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 21:52, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the heads up @Zippybonzo. ♒️ 98TIGERIUS 🐯 04:58, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@98Tigerius: All of our old RedWarn pages have moved already. We just haven't changed the top banner since UV doesn't have a 1.0 release yet. Right now, UV is already equipped with a lot of the basic features, and it's just a matter of porting all of the old features back in (and for MAT and Quick Templates, redesigning the process entirely). Implementing these would benefit a sprint, but it's slowly been just me doing the work as other members of the team have been busy with real life things (and so have I). I don't like giving timetables when I don't know if I can fulfill it, so there's no estimations on when UV 1.0 will be out. @Zippybonzo's right in that UV still lacks features, but if you don't use anything in Wikipedia:Ultraviolet/Compatibility matrix labeled "Not yet", then switching over shouldn't be an issue. Ultimately it's up to you on whether you'd like to switch or not. Chlod (UV â€˘ say hi!) 07:37, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Great and thanks a lot for giving more info about the progress of UV. I already used UV for short period but switch back to RW. You are doing well and all development team, keep it up! ♒️ 98TIGERIUS 🐯 13:50, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I wanted to ask how this is going since it's been quite a while; is there a timeline on it?
It looks like quick templating is the main feature still missing. Could the code for this just be copied from RW for a stopgap? – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 19:01, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also asking a question: When will 1.0 release? as it is 2025 and nothing has happened yet. Theeverywhereperson (talk here) 08:47, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm starting to wonder if it's no longer in active development. There hasn't been any news on it in a while. ― Blaze WolfTalkblaze__wolf 16:54, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Blaze Wolf, on the vue branch it was last updated 3 weeks ago. Qwerfjkltalk 08:09, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ah I see. I don't really keep track of that so I had no idea. ― Blaze WolfTalkblaze__wolf 13:54, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The UV tool does not appear

[edit]

A few days ago, I installed UV. After that, it suddenly disappeared. Can you tell me where I can get the UV tool back? JohnDavies9612 (talk) 08:36, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Update?

[edit]

Not trying to pester or rush, but just wondering if UV is still in active development? I noticed the last release was almost a full year ago. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 12:37, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A good question. When the Going Ultraviolet sticky section at tbe top of this page was added, back in February 2022, it specifically advised Stick to RedWarn while we're still working on implementing all the features. So I didn't switch. Three and a half years later, that advice is still there. So the status of Ultraviolet, to me at least, is very unclear. MichaelMaggs (talk) 11:57, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

using this for regular edits?

[edit]

I was recently reverted with an edit summary such as this example "Reverting edit(s) by CapnZapp (talk) to rev. 12345678 by SomeOne: WP:BRD - see talk, (UV 0.1.6)"

I click the link, get here, and is surprised to see this is a counter-vandalism tool.

Does this mean that user considered my edit (that was reverted) to be vandalism??

I am going to AGF and guess, no, it was just a regular edit by someone who happen to have this script installed. The edit did evoke Bold, Revert, Discuss, but still, it also was marked as an edit made using what you characterize as "used to revert problematic edits, warn and report editors, request page protection and perform other moderation and maintenance tasks."

I do not believe I was reverted for any of these reasons.

If the intent is for this tool to be used on a regular basis, as something a user might enable and keep turned on "always" (for all or the majority of edits), please change your introductory sentence, to make it clear that using UltraViolet (and marking edits with something like "UV 0.1.6") should not be taken to mean that edit is necessarily combating vandalism.

A counter-vandalism tool should only mark edits to say "this edit was made using a counter-vandalism tool" if the edit actually countered vandalism.

Either that or please reword your introduction to make it clear this tool might ALSO be used for completely "vanilla edits", with zero intent to implicate vandalism.

Thx, CapnZapp (talk) 10:18, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Some context: this tool also includes options for reverting good faith edits, test edits, unsourced content additions, MOS issue edits etc etc
A lot of the revert options included aren’t necessarily ‘vandalism’, for example new users trying to contribute in good faith but causing issues due to lack of knowledge of processes and policies.

I’m pretty sure the edit summary usually includes the selected reason for the revert unless the reverter chose the plain old ‘rollback’ option and didn’t add an edit summary. In this case the summary referenced a policy and invited users to see the talk page of the article, so I don’t think anything there implies the edit was considered vandalism.

The lead of the WP:UV page does say something along the lines of ‘perform moderation tasks and other maintenance edits’ as well.

Personally I don’t see this as a big enough issue to warrant a disclaimer in the introductory paragraph of UV. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 12:57, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AGF revert icon

[edit]

RedWarn's AGF revert icon is currently a green thumbs-up, which often trips me up as I expect it to mean "thanks" instead of anything related to reverting. I'm wondering if it could be replaced by something more similar to the "revert with summary" icon (maybe a green circular arrow with a smaller thumbs-up, which I could design if needed)? Chaotic Enby (talk ¡ contribs) 06:02, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support, I often find myself doing the same as a green thumbs up doesn’t inherently mean ‘revert’ to
me and has more of a ‘send thanks’ meaning. Good suggestion @Chaotic Enby! SnowyRiver28 (talk) 12:43, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Similar to my previous edit request to add a warning, can the newly created {{uw-addalink}} (single-issue notice created following this discussion) be added with the following code block? 

	"addALink": {
		"name": "Mistakes with the Add a Link newcomer task",
		"category": "Reminders",
		"template": "uw-addalink",
		"warningLevels": [
			0
		]
	},

This parallels my pull request for Twinkle's support of this notice. Chaotic Enby (talk ¡ contribs) 06:08, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are now a template editor so can do this yourself. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:41, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I didn't know whether I was allowed to accept my own template edit requests! Chaotic Enby (talk ¡ contribs) 15:58, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redwarn dissappeared

[edit]

None of the buttons suddenly show up for redwarn, have tried simple measures like restarting browser (chrome) and uninstalling and installing again, but no luck. What gives? TylerBurden (talk) 18:37, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you getting any errors in your browser console? See Help:CONSOLE ―sportzpikachu my talkcontribs 18:40, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You can check for script conflicts by using safemode and then pasting 
importScript("User:10nm/beta.js)
into the browser console.— Qwerfjkltalk 19:03, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you both for your suggestions, it appears to have come back on its own. TylerBurden (talk) 16:05, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to say I've faced a similar issue with Ultraviolet back in February. Just like TylerBurden, the tools seemed to have appeared on their own. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 18:10, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ultraviolet on the Minecraft Wiki

[edit]

how do i install this gadget on an external wiki? i am trying to install it on the Minecraft Wiki on my personal common.js there. 🐟 Harringstars 🐟 20:32, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Harringstars, if you look at the developer console, do you see an error like "Error loading Ultraviolet! AggregateError: SyntaxError: JSON.parse: unexpected end of data at line 1 column 1 of the JSON data"? — Qwerfjkltalk 20:36, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
yes i do 🐟 Harring F. Stars 🐟 21:19, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Harringstars, I suppose it's because the ultraviolet configuration page doesn't exist on that wiki. Qwerfjkltalk 13:59, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tgvfo

[edit]

I can’t find the tool in gadgets or RedWarn. Houcaris/Zhenghecaris |Talk | 02:29, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for discussion of Template:Shared IP advice

[edit]

Template:Shared IP advice has been nominated for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Sugar Tax (talk) 10:06, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]