Topic on Talk:Talk pages project/New topic/Flow

We've implemented the feature with an opt-in in T269310. There is documentation available at Special:MyLanguage/Help:DiscussionTools#Experimental: Preloading message content.

In the coming weeks, the New Discussion Tool will become available as a Beta Feature at the Arabic, Czech and Hungarian Wikipedias.

As the work finishes to make this happen, we are thinking about preloaded text and how the New Discussion Tool can support pages that use this functionality. As part of this thinking, we have two questions for you all:

Questions

1) As someone who would like for people to be able to use the New Discussion Tool on a page that uses preloaded text, what do you think about the "Approach for enabling preloads" (below)? What problems could you foresee arising from this approach?

2) On what page(s) at your local wiki do you think "Question #1" should be shared? Reason: we'd like as many people as possible who look after talk pages that use preloads to share what they think about this approach.

Approach for enabling preloads

1. Copy and paste the page's existing preload text onto a new page
2. Modify the existing preload text to ensure it meets the requirements (listed below)
3. That's it. People who have the New Discussion Tool enabled would now be able to use it on this page. People who have not enabled the New Discussion Tool will see now changes to their experience for adding a new discussion topic.

Preloaded text requirements

• Instructions are included within the editintro parameter instead of wikitext comments (<!--...-->)
• If you have a signature (~~~~) in the preloaded text, ensure it's at the end so that the tool doesn't insert another one
• Avoid {{subst:…}} syntax
• Remove redundant instructions, like advising people to sign the new topic they create since the New Discussion Tool will do this automatically

Hi, Peter, I’ve never made a preload nor seen that manual page before now, so I’m looking at this from the n00b angle! Is the idea that you would change a button/link from ?action=edit&section=new&preload=Old_preload_with_comments to ?action=edit&section=new&preload=New_preload_without_comments&editintro=New_instructions?

The difficulty I see is that the edit instructions aren’t very noticeable with DT disabled. At least on w:en where I tested, they sit above the copyright warning.

hey @Pelagic – we appreciate you thinking about this. A comment and a question in response to the feedback you shared...

Is the idea that you would change a button/link from ?action=edit&section=new&preload=Old_preload_with_comments to ?action=edit&section=new&preload=New_preload_without_comments&editintro=New_instructions?

I'm going to ping @Matma Rex who I think can answer this question best.

The difficulty I see is that the edit instructions aren’t very noticeable with DT disabled. At least on w:en where I tested, they sit above the copyright warning.

Would it be accurate for me to understand the "edit instructions" you mentioned above as referring to how the <!-- Some instructions in a comment. --> appears on this page in edit mode?

If so, I agree with you in assuming this would be difficult for someone who was not explicitly looking for this to notice.

Although, in this particular context, we are talking about the edit notice(s) that can appear:

• In the visual editor, within the toolbar's "⚠️" button. See: Help:VisualEditor/User guide#Getting started: the visual editor's toolbar.
• In the source editor, above the copyright notice (as you noted above).

Does the above help clarify what we mean by "edit instructions" in this context?

Yes.

Sorry for the delay in returning here. Yes, we’re talking about the same thing. The editnotice/editintro is fairly obvious in VE and NWE, but less so in the classic editor.

In source mode, <!-- instructions in a comment --> are the most noticeable, but in VE they are truncated.

If updating the preloads to the new format means they will work less well in classic editor, then users may not want to change.

Yes, it seems problematic on huwiki as well (“production” form, linked from the welcome template), although at least the copyright warning is below the edit box, not above it. Adding class="mw-message-box" to the container of the edit intro area could help, at the cost of potentially breaking (making look ugly) some edit intros. By the way, this particular preload may work out of the box (although I raised some concerns about the preloaded title in phab:T270797#6783966 that haven’t been answered yet). On the other hand, the user rename form is never going to work with these constraints.

This question is probably best asked on the technical village pump of the Hungarian Wikipedia, people caring about preloads are probably most likely to be found there.

These examples and links are helpful – thank you for sharing them here, @Tacsipacsi. Some resulting questions for you below.

...it seems problematic on huwiki as well (“production” form, linked from the welcome template), although at least the copyright warning is below the edit box, not above it.

Can you share in more detail how the approach could conflict with this form? At first glance, I didn't see anything in this example from hu.wiki that seemed problematic. Although, I suspect you are noticing something I'm not...

(although I raised some concerns about the preloaded title in phab:T270797#6783966 that haven’t been answered yet

Shoot. I'm sorry the question you raised has gone unanswered for this long. Would it be accurate for me to understand the question you are raised in T270797#6783966 as: "Would it be possible for the preloads to automatically populate the "Subject" / "Title" field immediately when the tool opens?

On the other hand, the user rename form is never going to work with these constraints.

Is this because of the "Avoid {{subst:…}} syntax" requirement?

...it seems problematic on huwiki as well (“production” form, linked from the welcome template), although at least the copyright warning is below the edit box, not above it.

Can you share in more detail how the approach could conflict with this form? At first glance, I didn't see anything in this example from hu.wiki that seemed problematic. Although, I suspect you are noticing something I'm not...

As Pelagic also noted, the edit notice is—in our opinion—hard to notice using the full-page editing interface, it doesn’t stand out properly.

(although I raised some concerns about the preloaded title in phab:T270797#6783966 that haven’t been answered yet

Shoot. I'm sorry the question you raised has gone unanswered for this long. Would it be accurate for me to understand the question you are raised in T270797#6783966 as: "Would it be possible for the preloads to automatically populate the "Subject" / "Title" field immediately when the tool opens?

Not exactly. I expect that subject preloading will work, my question is whether the complex wiki syntax (~~~) will be supported.

On the other hand, the user rename form is never going to work with these constraints.

Is this because of the "Avoid {{subst:…}} syntax" requirement?

Yes.

@Tacsipacsi: this additional context is helpful. Comments in response below...

As Pelagic also noted, the edit notice is—in our opinion—hard to notice using the full-page editing interface, it doesn’t stand out properly.

Ah, okay. Understood. A key consideration we will have in mind when implementing edit notices within the New Discussion Tool is making sure people notice them. This idea is captured in the "Requirements" section of T269033's task description. If you think this can be articulated more clearly, please comment as much on that ticket.

...my question is whether the complex wiki syntax (~~~) will be supported.

Yes, the New Discussion Tool's Title field should already support ~~~ and other wikitext. See: https://en.wikipedia.beta.wmflabs.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3APpelberg-test&type=revision&diff=482568&oldid=479512.

@PPelberg (WMF) I only just saw this, but glad to hear it's in the works. For en.wikiversity, this'll be super helpful e.g.:

• This link uses a preload talk template to format up comments such as those on this list. It uses subst: but I think that's to omit the commented out text.

I agree with the recommendation to use the editintro parameter for instructions - it'd be much more robust and readable for new users anyway.

Ideally, the preloaded template would be opened into editing mode immediately upon pageload (i.e. without having to click the template and select edit).

The logical places to post Q1 there would be Wikiversity:Colloquium (and probably link to that discussion from Talk:WikiJournal_User_Group).

Additional query: Would the preload functionality be at all possible in the standard reply link? This could be super useful for formatting up certain kinds of structured discussions (example using review and response templates).

I don't think that's been considered before. phab:T285358 is the bug number; feel free to edit it to add more information.

We've implemented the feature with an opt-in in T269310. There is documentation available at Special:MyLanguage/Help:DiscussionTools#Experimental: Preloading message content.