Last modified: 2014-11-13 12:18:07 UTC
NicoV reports this diff, https://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Blood_Lad&diff=96657484&oldid=96506947 . Assuming the user deleted the infobox without realizing it, I did not manage to reproduce the duplication of categories inside a reference tag (line 38); if I just copy/paste them they get nowikied, so it shouldn't be a vandalism. CCing subbu and gwicke here. 50120 and 52238 come to mind, but I'm not sure if it's really a dupe. Thanks.
(In reply to comment #0) > NicoV reports this diff, > https://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index. > php?title=Blood_Lad&diff=96657484&oldid=96506947 > . > Assuming the user deleted the infobox without realizing it, I did not manage > to > reproduce the duplication of categories inside a reference tag (line 38); if > I > just copy/paste them they get nowikied, so it shouldn't be a vandalism. Can you clarify what you mean with 'just copy/paste them'? Do you mean copy/pasting wikitext into VE?
Yes Gabriel, I tried to behave like a vandal :) and wanted to paste templates and categories into the reference, to understand if this was what the user had actually done. But as you can see here https://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Utilisateur%3AElitre_%28WMF%29%2FProve&diff=96710198&oldid=96710142 my result is different, in that the pasted content generated nowiki tags, so the duplication in the article is not a result of copy/pasting that content into the reference editor.
https://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bello_de_Carcassonne&diff=107097528&oldid=107091155 duplicated two categories and added others, but not within a ref tag. It also added a blank (== ==) section heading after the misplaced cats.
Think this was all fixed
