Topic on Talk:Talk pages project/New discussion

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Evolution and evolvability (talkcontribs)

What do you like about the proposed design?

Clean and simple - consistent with the design principles used in the [reply] tool

What do you wish was different in the proposal?

It might be worth putting a similarly formatted box around the section heading (since being outside the bordered draft box will reduce new users' likelihood to entering it). I appreciate that

Can you compare the designs being proposed here to the current experience? Can you accomplish your current workflow for adding new discussions with this proposal?

This is relatively similar to the plain [add section] link that I use in WP and WV. However the main advantages when combined with the reply link are: visual consistency, auto-signing for new users, easier pinging. Currently, there's a non-functional when using [add section], where it asks what you want the edit summary to be, but it's autofilled and un-editable, so it'd be worth simply skipping that step.

What other improvements do you think would be valuable for us to consider making to the new tool?

Will it note to non-logged-in users that their IP will be public?

JKlein (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Thanks for your feedback. A few folks have brought up the formatted text input box so I plan on iterating on that part of the interface.

PPelberg (WMF) (talkcontribs)

+1, Jess – thank you for taking the time to review the designs and share this feedback, @Evolution and evolvability.

A couple of comments below...

...It might be worth putting a similarly formatted box around the section heading

As @JKlein (WMF) noted above, we will be iterating on the design to make it more clear to people the subject/title field is editable. The ticket where this work will happen is (T267442).

Currently, there's a non-functional when using [add section], where it asks what you want the edit summary to be, but it's autofilled and un-editable, so it'd be worth simply skipping that step.

Good spot. We considered excluding the summary field for the reasons you mentioned. Tho, to keep the consistency between the Reply and New Discussion Tool interface [and for ease of implementation] we've kept it in for now, albeit nested inside the Advanced dropdown and not required. In doing so, we are assuming Junior Contributors will not become confused and/or distracted by it and Senior Contributors will be able to discover this functionality should they need it.

Patrik L. (talkcontribs)

@Evolution and evolvability One note: "In the future IP addresses of unregistered users will not be shown for everyone. They will get an alias instead. There will be a new user right or an opt-in function for more vandal fighters to see the IPs of unregistered users. There would be some criteria for who gets the user right or opt-in. There will also be other new tools to help handle vandalism. This is early in the process and the developers are still collecting information from the communities before they suggest solutions." Copied from Tech News.

Reply to "Initial designs feedback: Thomas Shafee"