Please can the edit summary input box be revealed by default? Many of us would like to provide a more helpful ES than "Reply", if only we were prompted to do so.
Topic on Talk:Talk pages project/Replying/Flow
Thanks to your comment User:Certes, it appears the WMF has installed the ability to add an edit summary. Ottawahitech (talk) 13:51, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
If you open the "Advanced" menu, which contains the edit summary input, it will be revealed for future replies.
Yes, I saw that, and it's a useful feature once discovered. Perhaps the menu should be open automatically for everyone.
I actually came here to suggest that. Sometimes an edit summary of "reply" is fine, but at least 60% of the time it would be helpful to leave more than that.
I was also going to suggest this. If the text is short enough, it should be put into the edit summary.
Longer texts may be included by being truncated, but if at least short replies were put into the edit summary field, that would make it more useful.
Yes, we could go further and suggest text for an edit summary. But the simple first step I was suggesting is to replicate the functionality we have in the current workflow (replying by editing the page/section), of revealing the edit summary box to everyone who hasn't consciously opted out of it. I think that just requires setting a different default value for a flag.
I talked to the product manager about putting short replies into the edit summary automagically, but there is a significant downside: if someone posts something and thinks better of it later, then getting that original text off the wiki requires help from an admin or oversighter, because edit summaries can't be edited after posting.
I looked through talk-page edit summaries for non-Reply-tool replies at the English Wikipedia a couple of months ago (filtering out script-assisted edits, new sections, etc.). Half the editors didn't add an edit summary at all, or only used a generic edit summary like "re". There are a few editors who are strongly committed to good edit summaries on talk pages, but most of us don't use it even when it's easy to do so.
I understand the reasons for not automatically copying content into the edit summary. However, making the box visible by default (with "Reply" or a blank summary) should help the 50% of editors who use talk edit summaries, without unduly inconveniencing the others, and doesn't seem like a difficult change.
@Certes EDIT SUMMARIES have been available at en-wikiquote for a-wiki-while now, and so has a REPLY-PREVIEW.
The edit summaries are used by some of the few who use the REPLY tool there, so you can see them in action. HTH
I think the issue is that, when using the reply tool, the default setting hides the edit summary field under small text that says "advanced" with a little arrow that you have to click on in order to find the edit summary field. This is not intuitive. What we are requesting is that the edit summary field be displayed by default, rather than hidden by default as it currently is.
Yes, thank you ONUnicorn, that is exactly what we are requesting. Some editors would also like the edit summary autofilled with a copy of the reply, but that is a separate request and need not hold up the simple change of default from hidden to displayed.
@User:Certes, Just curious: when you say "we" who do you mean? Me and you or others as well? I also do not understand what you mean when you say "change of default from hidden to displayed." Thanks in advance,
By "change of default from hidden to displayed", I meant that an editor who does not deliberately change their preferences (including a logged-out or IP editor) would be offered a box for an edit summary, rather than first having to discover that the button marked "Advanced" reveals it.
By "we" I did mean you and I, but perhaps I'm the only person who wants to see the edit summary box or receive any clue that it exists. I suspect that 99% of affected editors will never find this talk page on a different wiki.