Talk:Talk pages project

This page is for discussing the Talk pages project.

List of subscriptions?

Greetings and felicitations. Is there a place I can see a list of pages such as this one to which I am subscribed? If not, I propose that such a thing be created (in the coders' no doubt copious free time ;-) ). —DocWatson42 (talk) 17:30, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

@DocWatson42: There's Special:TopicSubscriptions for each of the threads, and Special:Watchlist for all pages that you're watching – are either of these what you had in mind? Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 17:40, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

I apologize for my tardiness in replying—I just noticed this. I mean the former—the newer talk page subscriptions. —DocWatson42 (talk) 19:41, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

@DocWatson42: No problem! Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 20:44, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

The former is exactly what I was looking for—thank you very much. ^_^ —DocWatson42 (talk) 21:02, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Problems in Vivaldi browser

I don't know if this is the right place to ask this, but if not, I trust someone will signpost me. I already asked a related question at Talk:Talk_pages_project/Replying#Quick_reply_temperamental but now realise this is a wider problem. I'm using the Vivaldi browser, and recently I'm having trouble with the 'reply' function, which sometimes works, and sometimes doesn't. When it doesn't, sometimes page refresh helps, but usually not. The 'add topic' and 'subscribe' features seem to be equally problematic, but since I use them less frequently it took me a while longer to realise this.

Is this a known problem? If so, is it limited to Vivaldi only, and would using a different browser get around it? If it is only Vivaldi, I'm happy to raise this with their tech support, but in that case could someone give me a brief description of how this functionality works and what might be causing the problem.

Thanks, DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:58, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

@DoubleGrazing: Per Compatibility#Browsers:

These browsers are not common enough to justify the added maintenance cost for software development and are essentially never tested. Problems users perceive in these browsers are given low priority.

… so it's certainly possible that the code isn't compatible with the Vivaldi browser, and it's very unlikely that the team responsible would work on fixing this, sorry. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 18:18, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks @Jdforrester (WMF). If that's all it is, then the workaround is easy enough, I'll just use a different browser. I might still report this to Vivaldi, in case they can figure out what to do about it at their end. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:52, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

"Discussion Tools" customization

Hi, is there a way to customize Discussion Tools to where it works and how it appears? And other things? ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk to me? 22:46, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Some page-level configuration is described on Help:DiscussionTools/Magic words and markup. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 15:26, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Please fix issues in the Reply tool

Please fix the issues breaking the DiscussionTools/Reply tool that allows convenient replies without editing section wikitext. The following is copied from the wish W368: Fix the issues breaking the Reply tool. If you have experienced any of these problems and would like them to get fixed, consider voting on that wish.

The Reply tool is useful as it allows convenient quick replying as is basically standard on all major websites. If it can't be used one has to edit the wikitext of the whole section which is inconvenient, cumbersome, and one doesn't have a live-preview of what one is writing. There are several issues that cause the Reply tool to either be disabled for some pages or to screw up the reply so that one has to edit it after posting. Please fix these problems:

• When somebody screwed up indentation, i.e. with the source editor added a reply without indentation (same layer as original post), then it puts the reply above that comment that misses indentation when using the Reply tool instead of putting it at the bottom. I hope it's clear what I mean. It should put the reply in the correct layer at the bottom and maybe it could even fix the indentation of other comments by adding colons before their text.
• The reply button is missing in empty sections. I think e.g. here there should also be a reply button in those sections that only have a header so one can use the Reply tool for replying instead of the source editor.
• People often if not usually use a bullet point in deletion discussions. With the reply tool it moves the signature to a new line (example). Please enable that the signature can also be put into the same line somehow. Example solution: if a comment only has one bullet point but not multiple it should not add a newline at the end.
• When using <gallery> it shows correctly in the preview but screws it up when publishing due to the indentation. See e.g. c:Special:Diff/949550947. The gallery disappears.
• When using templates it can add double dots : example (here is the change to how the reply should have looked like).
• When replying many times to one another, it doesn't add linebreaks / {{Outdent }} in long comment chains which can result in the comment being squished to a very small width on the side. (example)
• Sometimes it the reply tool can't be used on pages where it usually works. (I'll see if I can find an example; if anybody has one, please link it.)
• The reply tool still can't be used in various pages like en:Template talk:Did you know where it displays error (I think that one is also often displayed for the above issue) The "reply" link cannot be used to reply to this comment. To reply, please use the full page editor by clicking "Edit source". More information about this error.
• One can't reply to unsigned comments even after adding the username with {{Unsigned }}
• For some comments the tool just shows "The "⧼discussiontools-replylink⧽" link cannot be used to reply to this comment. To reply, please use the full page editor by clicking "Edit"." when clicking Reply (example) and for some sections there is no reply button at all such as the Discussion sections for Property proposals on Wikidata.

Also it seems like on various projects one has to enable "Discussion tools" in the preferences under Beta features. I hope this Reply tool could be moved from beta to become the default standard way people reply on talk pages with few exceptions. That it apparently needs to be enabled first is especially problematic since it is most useful for new users.

Additionally, the following feature would improve things a lot:

• Adding a button beneath threads to mark a section as solved (see c:Template:Section resolved). This was available in the deprecated DiscussionTools but it's not available with the Reply tool. See also related wish Do not fully archive unsolved issues on Talk pages. Marking things as solved enables contributors to see more (/any) still open issues and to focus on these and see them on a glance etc. It's basically for the same reason that open source projects do not show all the issues without a way to separate solved (which could be many) and open issues. It's basically required for efficiency and for having talk pages that aren't overflowing with long-solved threads, causing many people to e.g. not read any of them or to not work on addressing these.

Prototyperspective (talk) 01:02, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for these details. I'll make sure the team is aware, and investigate if phab tasks exist/are needed for each. (if you're aware of existing specific phab tasks, it would help to link those inline with each point)

Re: the point about {{Unsigned }} -- I believe those do generally work properly, IFF the template is used properly. I.e. the template must include both a user-string, and a standard timestamp. (E.g. I see (from a search) some earlier examples in this wiki do not have one/both of those, but this example works as expected).

Cheers, Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 19:38, 14 November 2025 (UTC)