Talk:Talk pages project/Mobile

Let's do something now for mobile editors
Pinging some of my local friends: @Dyolf77 (WMF), @Omotecho, @Miya, @Fralambert, @Jules*

The problem: If you use a smartphone, it's difficult to edit, and it's really difficult to post a comment. But there are a lot of mobile editors, and they need to join discussions, too.

The proposed solution: Let's turn on the Reply tool and the New Discussion tool at the mobile site. (The [reply] tool is already turned on for all editors on the desktop site. The New Discussion tool is only in the Beta Feature.  However, the New Discussion tool is probably better than the existing tools for mobile editors.)

The problem with the proposed solution: If you go to the mobile site (see this page on the mobile site), it starts in a collapsed, mobile-friendly form. If you want to read the page, you have to click "Read as wiki page" at the bottom of the page. To make the Reply tool work, we need to set the mobile site to "Read as wiki page" first. This change would affect all mobile editors at your Wikipedia. This means a trade-off:


 * Mobile users get the Reply tool and New Discussion tool. 😇
 * The talk pages look different on the mobile site. 🙂, 😖, 😳, 😲?

This is a big visual change. I don't want to surprise people. Where should I be asking your community about this? At a village pump? Is there a page for mobile editors at your wiki? Should we try to run a banner notice for mobile users? If this seems like a bad trade-off, I want people to tell me before the devs are ready to do this. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 21:02, 7 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi, thank you to keep on eyes, for language communities, and as an icebreaker (at the dead of winter here), perhaps we can talk numbers? I mean, could you share mobile user population vs desktop view users, in a very rounded up statistics?
 * Myself switch between mobile and desktop views, and one advantage is when I wish to scan why I've got a ping via mail from the Watchlisted pages. As you pointed out, collapsed view is easier to spot the target section, as for jawp-specific landscape, I am afraid not many talk pages apply archiving: I was noted we have unwritten rules/norm that you should keep all threads visible but not archive in most cases. Of course, RfC and any discussion-busy pages are bot-archived.
 * Standing among that landscape, I am honestly not quite sure how we scale the majority to target at. My hunch tells speaking up on talk pages, in general, esp on ja language communities, it has an wiki-age bias: longer you stay, you will become more silent or enjoy Read-Only-Mode, seldom offering comments or time tested wisdom.
 * On demography, "Read as wiki page" format and readers' happiness. If we consider those using tablets, on top of smartphones, then will it change how "happy" the format shift be accepted among audiences? Our pie multiples if you include those  "silent uses", or people at school age. FYI, ja society (domestic) in general has been appreciating that elementary schools supply their students with tablets per head for studying remotely. One thing the pandemic did for the good of equality at education (
 * No data at hand, though I guess ja schools won't allow their students to create accounts using their devices, other than accessing their own carricula. It could be implied that our non-login users include those developing web users, or our future editors. Are we giving them a bright picture if shifting to "Read as wiki page"?
 * Or retirees who come to our projects, who have more choices to create their accounts, but yet to bud as Wikimedians?
 * Is it so hard to have the workflow as: collapsed view -> [some action] -> [push reply button] -> start writing -> save/preview/post? My low tech brain itches (-- Omotecho (talk) 00:45, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Omotecho, here are the numbers I have readily available: There are a lot of newcomers using the mobile site. Experienced editors tend to use the desktop site. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 22:30, 8 February 2022 (UTC)