Talk:Talk pages project

Jump to navigation Jump to search

About this board

This page is for discussing the Talk pages project. The software interface on this page is Structured Discussions ("Flow"), which is not part of the Talk pages project.

Webfil (talkcontribs)

Bonjour. Quand une réponse est faite au même niveau qu'une réponse précédente, l'indentation ne correspond pas aux recommandations de fr:wp:Aide:Indentation#La réponse de même niveau sans séparation.

Par exemple la discussion fictive suivante :

Bonjour tout le monde! --Utilisateur1, 1 janvier 2001 00:01

: Bonjour {{ping|Utilisateur1}}, ça va bien? --Utilisateur2, 1 janvier 2001 00:03

:: {{ping|Utilisateur2}} très bien merci. --Utilisateur1, 1 janvier 2001 00:05

:Bonjour {{ping|Utilisateur1}}. --Utilisateur3, 1 janvier 2001 00:07

donne le rendu suivant :

Bonjour tout le monde! --Utilisateur1, 1 janvier 2001 00:01

Bonjour @Utilisateur1:, ça va bien? --Utilisateur2, 1 janvier 2001 00:03
@Utilisateur2: très bien merci. --Utilisateur1, 1 janvier 2001 00:05
Bonjour @Utilisateur1:. --Utilisateur3, 1 janvier 2001 00:07

Admettons un hypothétique Utilisateur4 qui désire répondre à Utilisateur1, Outil de réponse indente sa réponse comme si son message était dans la continuité de celui d'Utilisateur3, alors qu'il devrait y avoir un marqueur de séparation de niveau inférieur.

Code actuel généré avec Outil de réponse :

Bonjour tout le monde! --Utilisateur1, 1 janvier 2001 00:01

: Bonjour {{ping|Utilisateur1}}, ça va bien? --Utilisateur2, 1 janvier 2001 00:03

:: {{ping|Utilisateur2}} très bien merci. --Utilisateur1, 1 janvier 2001 00:05

:Bonjour {{ping|Utilisateur1}}. --Utilisateur3, 1 janvier 2001 00:07

:Salut {{ping|Utilisateur1}}. --Utilisateur4, 1 janvier 2001 00:09

Rendu actuel :

Bonjour tout le monde! --Utilisateur1, 1 janvier 2001 00:01

Bonjour @Utilisateur1:, ça va bien? --Utilisateur2, 1 janvier 2001 00:03
@Utilisateur2: très bien merci. --Utilisateur1, 1 janvier 2001 00:05
Bonjour @Utilisateur1:. --Utilisateur3, 1 janvier 2001 00:07
Salut @Utilisateur1:. --Utilisateur4, 1 janvier 2001 00:09

Or, le code idéal selon la page d'aide serait le suivant :

Bonjour tout le monde! --Utilisateur1, 1 janvier 2001 00:01

: Bonjour {{ping|Utilisateur1}}, ça va bien? --Utilisateur2, 1 janvier 2001 00:03

:: {{ping|Utilisateur2}} très bien merci. --Utilisateur1, 1 janvier 2001 00:05

:Bonjour {{ping|Utilisateur1}}. --Utilisateur3, 1 janvier 2001 00:07

:Salut {{ping|Utilisateur1}}. --Utilisateur4, 1 janvier 2001 00:09

Avec un rendu comme celui-ci :

Bonjour tout le monde! --Utilisateur1, 1 janvier 2001 00:01

Bonjour @Utilisateur1:, ça va bien? --Utilisateur2, 1 janvier 2001 00:03
@Utilisateur2: très bien merci. --Utilisateur1, 1 janvier 2001 00:05
Bonjour @Utilisateur1:. --Utilisateur3, 1 janvier 2001 00:07
Salut @Utilisateur1:. --Utilisateur4, 1 janvier 2001 00:09

Systématiquement, quand je publie des réponses de même niveau que le message précédent, Outil de réponse fait un amalgame visuel et je dois intervenir avec le code pour rétablir l'indentation.

Est-ce que c'est possible d'ajuster le module afin qu'il ajoute une ligne comportant une indentation d'un cran inférieur avant de formuler une réponse de même niveau, pour permettre de séparer visuellement les réponses de même niveau?

Webfil (talkcontribs)

(Originally posted on wpfr Flow discussion page. Trizek, I believe this is the better place to discuss this issue?)

Reply to "Indentation"

Correct indentation when replying _within_ a discussion thread?

29
Summary by Whatamidoing (WMF)
Paracel63 (talkcontribs)

Hi! I notice that indendation goes one notch when replying to a discussion post. This is the same regardless if you put your reply at the bottom of the discussion or _within_ the discussion. In the latter case the indendation is the same as the earlier reply below, which makes telling the two posts apart. Would it be possibly to develop some sort of fix to this?

GhostInTheMachine (talkcontribs)

This is a reply to the first post

GhostInTheMachine (talkcontribs)

This is my third post, replying to my first post.

GhostInTheMachine (talkcontribs)

This is my fourth post, replying to my third post

GhostInTheMachine (talkcontribs)

And this is a reply to my first reply

GhostInTheMachine (talkcontribs)

This is my fifth post, replying to my second post

GhostInTheMachine (talkcontribs)

This is my fifth post, replying to my second post

GhostInTheMachine (talkcontribs)

This is my fifth post, replying to my second post

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)
GhostInTheMachine (talkcontribs)

Please could you point me to an overview of Flow vs. Structured Discussions post-Flow vs. Current developments vs. Plans for the future. — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 18:00, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)
Wargo (talkcontribs)

If you click reply on some message it will create one more step of ident under message you click "reply". If you want at identation at the same level as last message, click reply button on parent message. By clicking reply you are telling your message is releated to post you clicked and next identation tells it. If this doesn't happen this way, give link to example of discussion where it happens and with example of messages you want to reply.

Paracel63 (talkcontribs)

Thanks for the your reply, pointing to the general behaviour of the tool. What I was looking at was a way of making the indentation _two_ notches to the right, not one. That behaviour would mimick the normal behaviour when you reply manually within a thread, letting people know that your posting and the posting below are not directly related. Maybe comparing time stamps could implement such a behaviour? All the best.

Paracel63 (talkcontribs)

Just to be clear of what I'm talking about. It's about replying to a posting _inside_ an ongoing thread (between the postings), _not_ below all the previous postings of this thread.

Izno (talkcontribs)

You will need to provide an example. The only behavior I can see for this is, if not non-standard, then at least unusual and generally unnecessary.

Paracel63 (talkcontribs)

OK. Within the "modern" reply technique used on this very discussion page, such a behaviour is unnecessary, as the posting starts with the signature. When replying in the "traditional" discussion format (standard at my native sv:wp), any posting starts with plain text. A multi-paragraph reply inside a thread is distinguished by its indent, not by indent plus a starting signature. This make replies with the same indent harder to differentiate. You can see double indent being used when replying "within" in this thread (https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bybrunnen#Fortsatt_diskussion) and in this thread (https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bybrunnen#Stubb_och_noter). All the best.

Paracel63 (talkcontribs)
Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Some people like this style, and others don't. I've seen disputes at the English Wikipedia in which editors claim that their preference is the "correct" style. One style (the "double-indent") makes it easier to see which words were posted by which editor; the other style (the "same level") makes it easier to see which comment the second person was replying to.

If you are interested in the general subject of making it easier to see threading, then you might want to look at the pale blue lines on https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussion_Projet:Outils_de_discussion It doesn't separate comments at the same indentation level, but it does mark some things. Also, be on the lookout for a technical request for comment in a few weeks. If they settle on a style for wrapping complex content/solving some w:en:WP:LISTGAP problems, it might be easier to visually mark separate comments in the future.

Paracel63 (talkcontribs)

Thanks for the links and tips. I see that the replying tool I was referring to does not seem to put the reply after a posting inside a thread but at the end of the whole thread. So this behaviour defeats the purpose of posting inside a thread using this "gadget". So I'll return to replying manually, as all the other posters at sv:wp seem to do. All the best.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)

@Paracel63, can you give me a diff of the reply ending up in the wrong place? Was this at the Swedish Wikipedia?

Paracel63 (talkcontribs)

Hi! Here I produced a test thread on my user discussion page at sv:wp. Yes, the problems are happening at sv:wp. The postings are being numbered in the order they were posted; "efter X" means they are produced through clicking at [ svara ] at the end of that specific posting.

Results: #5 was placed after #4 (and not after #1); #6 was placed after #4 (and not after #3); #7 was (correctly!) placed after #4; #8 was placed after #6 (and not after #2; diff). So 3 out of 4 nested replies were not properly placed. It really seems like the tool does not identify the postings in the right chronological order.

Paracel63 (talkcontribs)
Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Yes, I've seen that. It places replies according to the list structure, rather than according to chronological order. This means that when you reply to comment #4, it places the comment in the first available sub-list space under comment #4, which happens to be immediately under it. Comment #5, which is a reply to comment #1, goes in the first available sub-list space under comment #1, which is even with comment #2 and at the end.

It might make more sense if you think of the discussion as being a real list or outline:

  1. Things I want for school
    1. Food
      1. Apples
      2. Oranges
    2. Clothing
      1. Comfortable shoes
    3. Computers
      1. Phone
      2. Laptop

If you were "replying" to "Things I want", you'd expect that to be #4 on the level with (and immediately after) #3 "Computers". But if you're "replying' to "Food", you want the list to put "Chocolate" after "Oranges", not after "Laptop".

If they built a strict chronological system, then you couldn't use the Reply tool to inject a comment into the middle of a long discussion, because your comment would always end up at the end of the section.

As a workaround, you can click the "Reply" button for a different comment, to get the placement where you want it to be. For example, if you want your comment at the end, then click the reply button for the last comment.

Paracel63 (talkcontribs)

Yes, you're correct. My reasoning was only consistent with my (original) wish to have a nested reply with enhanced indent and placed directly below the post being replied to. I totally agree that the indexing system is a good way of organising discussions with this tool, if others do not agree to my modus operandi. All the best. :-)

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)

I do still wish that the devs could figure out some sort of magic system that will put my replies where I think they belong. In the meantime, I think we're going to be stuck with the normal editor for that.

Reply to "Correct indentation when replying _within_ a discussion thread?"
Bluetpp (talkcontribs)

The tool has just been deploited on Vietnamese wikipedia, and after I've turned the feature on on the beta feature preference, I tried replying to some comments. After clicking into the reply button, that button disappeared but the reply box was nowhere to be found, and also all the other reply button turned into gray. What's wrong? Please help me.

Edit 1: Okay, it seems that other users in my wiki can still use the feature... but after I changed the browser the problem is still there.

Edit 2: After further testing I realized that the problem only appears if I click the reply button of the lastest comment. It'll be fine if it's not the lastest comment. What's wrong though?

Matěj Suchánek (talkcontribs)
Bluetpp (talkcontribs)

@Matěj Suchánek Okay, I tried purging, nothing changed. but I tried adding "?safemode=1" and voila, the reply box appears.

I follow the guide and there's indeed an issues on the "Console" tab but I cannot find the "Debugger" tab. Help me...

Matěj Suchánek (talkcontribs)

You probably don't need the debugger (if you want it, search the internet for how to find it in your browser), the console should tell you enough (especially with debug=1). Note that the console will also likely show some warnings but you are looking for "errors".

Bluetpp (talkcontribs)

I don't understand a single things in this image, can you please help me and take a look at it? I see that it has 2 errors...

Matěj Suchánek (talkcontribs)

Twinkle[module] is not a function points me to vi:MediaWiki:Gadget-Twinkle.js. It's quite worrying a project-wide gadget breaks, you should probably contact users who ported it to your wiki and tell them about this problem.

Cannot read property 'style' of null points to vi:MediaWiki:Gadget-AVIM.js, again a project-wide gadget. It's possible it needs be updated to work with DiscussionTools.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Bluetpp, would you please check this idea, by going to https://vi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Đặc_biệt:Tùy_ch%E1%BB%8Dn#mw-prefsection-gadgets and turning off Twinkle? (I use AVIM at viwiki, and the Reply tool works for me there, so I think AVIM is not the cause of the problem.) Please try turning off Twinkle, check for the Reply tool on a few pages, and then let me know whether it made a difference. (And then turn Twinkle back on, if you want to.)

ESanders (WMF) (talkcontribs)

We were able to post with Twinkle enabled: diff.

Bluetpp (talkcontribs)

@Whatamidoing (WMF) Hi, I'm the one asking you to exploit the tool in viwiki. So I've turned off Twinkle but it doesn't fix anything.

In [[:vi:Wikipedia:Thảo_luận#[TH%C3%94NG%20B%C3%81O]%20T%C3%ADnh%20n%C4%83ng%20beta%20m%E1%BB%9Bi:%20C%C3%B4ng%20c%E1%BB%A5%20th%E1%BA%A3o%20lu%E1%BA%ADn|this]] talk topic, somebody points out that if he replies to other comment first (not the lastest and with the deepest indent one) and then not refresh the page, he can then reply to the lastest comment.

@Matěj Suchánek Thanks, I'll try doing what you told and I'll update later.

Wargo (talkcontribs)

Did you try on your second account? Important: open the console before you click reply button and see what error messages income. Probably another gadget is problem.

Bluetpp (talkcontribs)
Error with Reply tool 1
Error with Reply tool 2

@Wargo Okay, I did what you told, used 2nd account, open the console before clicking reply button. Here it is:

Matma Rex (talkcontribs)
Bluetpp (talkcontribs)

@Matma Rex Yes! After turning the "comments in local time" off, it's back to normal! So what can I do? This is a massive bug isn't it?

Wargo (talkcontribs)

This gadget adds time tag. I think it will be easy to implement recognization of this. Maybe normal timestamp should also have these tags? ;)

PPelberg (WMF) (talkcontribs)

@Bluetpp we appreciate you making us aware of this issue and thank you, @Matěj Suchánek and @Wargo for helping us all identify the cause(s) of it.

The editing engineering team investigated this issue today and has come to think the following: it is possible for the Reply Tool to be enhanced so it can be compatible with the "Tin nhắn theo giờ địa phương" (Comments in local time) gadget @Matma Rex linked to above.

Said "enhancement" is described in this task: phab:T252555. However, it is likely this enhancement will not reach Vietnamese Wikipedia, and subsequently resolve the issue being discussed here, for a few weeks.

This means that in the meantime, you'll need to disable the "Tin nhắn theo giờ địa phương" (Comments in local time) gadget in order to use the Reply Tool (not ideal, we know :/ )

Please let us know if anything above prompts new thoughts or questions and thank you again for working with @Matěj Suchánek and @Wargo to figure out what was causing this issue.

PPelberg (WMF) (talkcontribs)

@Portal18 and @ネイ, I'm tagging you both here because I wanted you to be aware that we think the issue you were discussing here [i] will also be resolved by the fix we are implementing as part of phab:T252555.

---

i. Topic:Vu9kty6l1yu9i75i: Cannot use with "Change UTC-based times and dates, such as those used in signatures" Gadget

Reply to "Reply box does not appear"
JAn Dudík (talkcontribs)

In browser I have usually many tabs open. The tab of wiki where I am editing can be recognized by title starting with Edit…

I am actually editing second tab from right. But also first from the left.

But when using reply tool or Flow, is hard to recognize, which tab is the correct. When I want to search and copy something from other page, I must search, which tab is the right one.

If there is some way how to change title or design of actually edited tab, it would be useful.

Sunpriat (talkcontribs)

When editing in Wikipedia, I also often have more than 6 tabs open and often visually lose the tab on which the answer was started in the Reply tool or the edit started in the Visual editor, because out of habit I am looking for the tab with "Editing" in the title. I have to manually drag the tab to the beginning so that it becomes the first and I can easily find it. Some kind of marker in the header for a page in an editing state would be helpful.

Sometimes I have to open two versions of a page to view different parts of a long discussion. Sometimes I don't send messages instantly and they stay in the editing state for tens of minutes, at this time other pages open and many pages accumulate with a similar beginning of the namespace in the tabs. And if I scroll to other comments, for example to the beginning of a long thread, so that the edited place is outside the visible area in the browser, then when I return to this tab it looks like a usual inactive page - it takes time.

PPelberg (WMF) (talkcontribs)

@JAn Dudík and @Sunpriat, thank you for saying something about this. What might you expect the tab in which you have the Reply Tool open to say?

In the meantime, here is a task for this work: T262066.

Sunpriat (talkcontribs)

It will be recognizable as it was before "Editing: Title" or "Reply: Title" or status label "[reply] Title".

PPelberg (WMF) (talkcontribs)

@Sunpriat: to confirm, "title" in the example shared above would be the title of the talk page? The heading of the section within which you are replying? Something else?

Sunpriat (talkcontribs)

If there are a lot of tabs, I better remember the name of the page and less well remember the name of the section in it. Out of habit and by analogy with editing wiki-text, I would look for the text of the Tab title (as it was before editing) in the following words.

The section title is a good question. The section names in the tab, as in this topic, we saw only in Structured Discussions and this text is naturally understandable and even convenient. Not everyone has seen Structured Discussions on Wikipedia, for many it will be a new experience with titles. The title of the tab will be unique and will not look like the tabs next to it - this is interesting, but even so the title should be "reply: section - page title - wikipedia" to see the title of the page in the pop-up hint when you hover over the tab.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)

This seems like the kind of question that @TheDJ would know something about.

Reply to "Title of tab with reply draft"
GhostInTheMachine (talkcontribs)

Please fix the timestamps so that they display in the same format as set in my preferences.

Matěj Suchánek (talkcontribs)

What timestamps?

GhostInTheMachine (talkcontribs)

Timestamps displayed on these posts. Your question is marked as “an hour ago” which is itself a problem, since it was only 40 something minutes ago, but the time itself displays as 2:13pm which is not how my preference is set. It should be in 24 hour format as 14:13.

Matěj Suchánek (talkcontribs)

This is probably out of the scope of "Talk pages project". Fix for this in the Structured discussions project (a.k.a. Flow) is less likely to happen, given that the project isn't being developed anymore.

Reply to "Timestamps"
MediaWiki message delivery (talkcontribs)

15:11, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Jack who built the house (talkcontribs)

> Per request from the Arabic Wikipedia, each wiki will be able to set its own preferred symbol for pinging editors.

> some languages omit spaces before signatures

Thanks for posting these notes, I think I'll make corresponding changes to Convenient Discussions as well.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)

You're welcome. Arabic prefers an arrow on the right ("front") side of the name, like this: aaa◀️. I would not be surprised if other right-to-left languages felt that the @ symbol was a little awkward.

Reply to "Editing news 2020 #4"

indentation problem after list

3
JAn Dudík (talkcontribs)

When I reply to post which have format

Some text

  • list
  • list
  • list

the reply have same intendation as list lines.

Probably not easy to solve, but I report it.

Mathglot (talkcontribs)

JAn Dudík, yes, that's why I never end with a list item; even if it's only my signature on the line below it. What I do in practice, when the person I'm replying to does that, is just add an extra level of indent in my reply. Problem solved. Mathglot (talk) 00:41, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)

They used to use the last line (so the * in this example, resulting in ** or *: for the reply), and people complained that it should use the first line. Now they use the first line (the un-indented plain text, resulting in : for the reply), and people complain that it should be the old way.

There is no single "correct" way to do it, and editors have different personal preferences. I think they're going to have to pick one, knowing that it will be m:The Wrong Version.

Reply to "indentation problem after list"
JAn Dudík (talkcontribs)

I use wikitext editor. When I want to ping someone, I can copy his name form discussion above.

With this reply tool I don't see source. Problem is, when somebody have different username than appears in his signature e.g. [[User:John Walker|Johnnie Walker]], in that case user doesn't receive ping on his account.

It would be fine, if there is possibility to include ping template on the beginning with prefilled name of author of previous post. JAn Dudík (talk) 11:17, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)

In the visual mode, if you type the @ symbol, then it opens a list of everyone who has already commented in this discussion. (If the person you want hasn't joined the discussion, then you start typing the username, and it will let search for the user page.) Have you tried this?

JAn Dudík (talkcontribs)

Good to know, it works :-)

Reply to "Automatic ping template"
The Discoverer (talkcontribs)

Hello Editing team, I have seen that two of the areas the talk pages project is focussed on are:

  • Replying to specific comments
  • Starting a new discussion

Based on our experience in the Konkani community, these are important aspects of talk pages where those uncomfortable with Wiki-syntax usually struggle.

I would like to highlight another important area that I have noticed: managing old posts. Eventually, high-use talk pages become very long, and it is desirable to have some kind of archiving system like the bots on the English Wikipedia, or an unlimited scroll with loading-on-demand like Structured Discussions has. For a small community like ours, not having a lot of technical skill to implement bots, it would be ideal if such a system were built into Wikimedia. Have you considered this aspect as part of the task pages project?

The Discoverer (talkcontribs)
Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Hello, and thank you for your note.

Archiving was discussed in the consultation last year (see Talk pages consultation 2019/Phase 1 report#Archiving for a summary). The bot-based approach to archiving is complicated because it makes it hard to find previous discussions. But, of course, keeping everything on the page, especially since most wikis don't follow the modern internet convention of top-posting, leads to very long pages. This is particularly bad for editors using smartphones, who have to load and scroll through the whole page to reach the most recent discussion. Loading on demand works best with top-posting.

I agree with you that some archiving ought to be handled automatically. The Editing team is thinking about the possibility of improving some aspects of this situation. Unfortunately, I do not think that a real solution will be implemented during the next year.

The Discoverer (talkcontribs)

Hello Whatamidong, thanks for your reply. I was a bit disappointed to know that a solution is not on the horizon. It appears that we will have to look at implementing a bot-based system for the newly-launched Konkani Wiktionary.

You mentioned that "most wikis don't follow the modern internet convention of top-posting". Do any Wikimedia wikis use top-posting for discussion pages (apart from Flow boards)? Is this possible or feasible?

In my previous comment, I meant to say "it would be ideal if such a system were built into MediaWiki".

Mathglot (talkcontribs)

@The Discoverer:, can you elaborate on what the exact problem is with very long Talk pages? Is it that scrolling through the page to find the right discussion is cumbersome or takes a long time, or that the page takes a long time to load in areas of slow internet speed, or something else? If it's a scroll problem, there might be a solution involving rolling up/collapsing the sections by default. Mathglot (talk) 18:38, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

The Discoverer (talkcontribs)

@Mathglot, navigating and handling a long page is the issue felt first, when a page already has around 50 discussions. At this stage, the page size tends to be around 100kB. Loading time would probably come into play at a later stage, or if there are a lot of images, which usually doesn't happen on discussion pages.

I guess if the sections are collapsed by default and you reach around 100 discussions, it would still mean quite a bit of scrolling.

I think it would be great if either an archival system, or a loading-on-demand system (like Flow) were built into MediaWiki.

Mathglot (talkcontribs)
The Discoverer (talkcontribs)

@Mathglot, thanks for that. I will add the template to gomwiktionary too. It does not seem to work in mobile view, though.

In an earlier comment you mentioned tere might be a solution involving rolling up/collapsing the sections by default.

Mathglot (talkcontribs)

User:The Discoverer, are you comfortable altering the gom Template, to add the text "Skip to TOC" and "Skip to bottom" in Konkani? If not, if you paste the words below, I will add them for you. "TOC" is an abbreviation for "Table of Contents" in English. If an analogous abbreviation exists in Konkani, that would be preferable; otherwise, the translation of "Skip to Table of Contents / Skip to bottom" would be best. Mathglot (talk) 20:32, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

The Discoverer (talkcontribs)

Thanks @Mathglot. I think I can handle localising the template. Since the Konkani community use the interface in the Latin and Devanagari scripts, I intend to make use of MediaWiki messages so that users can see the text of the template in their preferred script. I'll ask you for help if I get stuck.

The Discoverer (talkcontribs)
Mathglot (talkcontribs)

I believe it's by design; not sure if it has to do with the "float" properties of that Template, but if I get enough time, I could probably figure it out.

As WaId commented below, they are rolled up on mobile view by default. Rolling them up by default in desktop view would, I believe, be a software change, although possibly it could be done by a bit of javascript that would look for your H2 sections on your talk page, and use the Before property to add a collapse bottom template (for the previous section), a blank line, and a collapse top (for that section) right under the header, and then you could stick that in your w:Special:MyPage/common.js. However, only you would see it that way, everyone else would see it expanded. You could add it to the gom-sitewide common.js, I believe, if there was Community support for that, and then everyone would see it that way.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)

The w:en:WP:TEAHOUSE originally used top-posting, but has since switched to bottom posting. I believe that conforming to the typical (Wikipedia) style was a significant factor in that decision. In Wikipedia's early days, neither top-posting nor bottom-posting were used. If you're interested in a bit of history, then Talk pages consultation 2019/Discussion tools in the past might be worth reading. I think we have done some of everything over the years.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)
The Discoverer (talkcontribs)

@Whatamidoing (WMF), thanks for your replies. The Discussion tools history page made for interesting reading. I used to be unhappy about the fact that our Konkani Wikimedians community does most of our discussion off-wiki, on WhatsApp. I was surprised to learn that initially, for the big Wikipedias too, most conversations were off-wiki. So this may be a normal path of progress for communities.

The Konkani Wikipedia community adopted Flow as the default discussion system, and we are quite comfortable with it. Sadly, when the Konkani Wiktionary was approved in March this year, our request to have Flow set up was declined.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)

They're not approving any new Flow installations. The system has many advantages, but it really needs some serious work. Have you tried out Help:DiscussionTools#Reply tool? I've left a link on one of your talk pages with a link that I think will work for you.

The Discoverer (talkcontribs)

Thanks, @Whatamidoing (WMF). Yes, I had tried the reply tool, and I think that it will be useful for us. The link that you left worked for me. I wasn't aware that the Reply tool had already been deployed to projects. This means that we can request for it to be enabled on all discussion pages on our project, doesn't it?

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)

It's still under development. The Konkani Wiktionary is already on their list to wikis to consider for the next round. The approved groups will get the Reply tool as a Beta Feature. I can add the Konkani Wikipedia to the list if you would like.

I am hoping that they will make some decisions in early August about that list. (It has taken longer than I expected.) Right now, I think it mostly depends upon Analytics' needs. They want to do some A/B testing on the next group.

The Discoverer (talkcontribs)

Thanks, @Whatamidoing (WMF). On the Konkani Wikipedia, Flow is the standard content model for discussion pages, and there are very few Wikitext discussion pages, so the utilisation of the Reply Tool on the Konkani Wikipedia will be low. We can still add Konkani Wikipedia to the list so that the editors see the same thing on both projects, especially since I've heard that Flow might eventually get uninstalled.

Reply to "Managing old discussions"

"Fixed width" is a different project

4
Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Just a heads-up to anyone who might find a different appearance on their talk pages:

As announced at w:fr:Wikipédia:Le Bistro/2 juillet 2020, the Reading/Web/Desktop Improvements project is planning to implement a fixed width screen size. This kind of change always takes a few days to get used to, and there's some research behind it, but if it's just not working for you, then @SGrabarczuk (WMF) has promised me that there will be a way to opt out of this via preferences. If you have questions, suggestions for a different default width, etc., then please go to mw:Talk:Reading/Web/Desktop Improvements.

The wub (talkcontribs)

To be clear, this is only going to be enabled by default for certain "early adopter" wikis: Basque/French/Hebrew/Persian Wikipedias, French Wiktionary, and Portuguese Wikiversity.

SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talkcontribs)

That's right. A link to opt-out easily will also be available in the sidebar, and this will be useful for the communities of the abovementioned wikis. For the vast majority of wikis, one will be able to opt-in individually via preferences.

Pelagic (talkcontribs)

Probably better to call it max-width rather than fixed-width. Anyone who remembers the bad old days of truly fixed width web pages that you had to scroll from side to side as you read across the lines on a small screen would have a conniption if they thought MediaWiki was going down that route.

Reply to ""Fixed width" is a different project"