Board Thread:Ask the Staff/@comment-24155515-20190925003841/@comment-24155515-20190925134800

Yeah, it's a false positive for something I hadn't initially noticed (that it's probably not worth trying to code in an exception to, in comparison to the amount of times it'd come up... but that's coming from someone not all that skilled in regex...) but it makes sense.

Gah, this reminds me I need to get better at regex and clean up a filter or two on the wiki I run...

As for getting all the parts of my edit through, I did the not-at-all-related-to-the-refs edits I had originally been trying to do in the same edit while I was waiting for an initial response to this thread. Then when the reason came to light, I just avoided editing the instance on that line and grabbed its ref name to copy to the other reference earlier in the article being sourced to the same URL (instead of the other way around), which was successful due to not touching that line. (So the edit wouldn't have been able to be done if that ref on the line tripping it hadn't been named, but it was, so... we're all good? *shrug*)

TL;DR: The structure of the edit was different but the visible outcome was the same, so yes, all parts of my edit went through.