|
**{{ping|Anne Delong}} What? Doesn't a link to the user talk page already exist, in the list of pages edited? ...Or am I missing something? '''[[User:Theopolisme|<span style="color:#232323;">Theopolisme</span>]] <span style="color:#4F4F4F;">([[User talk:Theopolisme|<span style="color:#4F4F4F;">talk</span>]])</span>''' 21:04, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
:::Yes, I declined one just now and realized that this is already done. Sorry; I will try to pay closer attention. But in that case I'm not sure why the other suggestions above would be needed, since someone wanting to leave a welcoming message could just click on that link and use Twinkle or write a message or plop in their favourite welcome template. The only thing I can think of that would be possibly helpful might be to have a small message near the user's talk page link suggesting leaving a welcome message, and that seems like a low priority change if needed at all. —[[User:Anne Delong|Anne Delong]] ([[User talk:Anne Delong|talk]]) 22:20, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
== [0.8] Placeholder text ==
I'm really not liking the placeholder text in the "input boxes" (terminology?) presented when declining a draft. I just declined one as "already exists" and the dialogue had "Chocolate chip cookies" in the space where the actual existing article title was to be entered. A "Comments" box was also pre-filled with a quite large paragraph of "blah blah" that I didn't bother to read. IMHO an "input box" should be empty when presented for filling - particularly when filling it is not mandatory. Reviewers are not newbies, I found the placeholder text to be quite patronizing. [[User:Dodger67|Roger (Dodger67)]] ([[User talk:Dodger67|talk]]) 11:04, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
:Fair enough. I'm inclined to agree with you, and you're entirely correct in that reviewers are hardly newbies. The goal is to find a balance between "no information provided at all" and "enough information provided to explain how a given field should be filled out"... {{ping|Anne Delong|Technical 13|Hasteur}} thoughts on removing these placeholders? (And/or which should be possibly retained/slimmed down/whatever). Thanks Roger for bringing this up! '''[[User:Theopolisme|<span style="color:#232323;">Theopolisme</span>]] <span style="color:#4F4F4F;">([[User talk:Theopolisme|<span style="color:#4F4F4F;">talk</span>]])</span>''' 20:57, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
::Hrm... Comment box I think could be blanked out, but I'm sondering if we want to pre-populate on some of these.... [[User:Hasteur|Hasteur]] ([[User talk:Hasteur|talk]]) 21:08, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
:* I actually prefer a fair amount of automated pre-selection/pre-filled text input fields. Quite often this is an extremely repetitious task and the more the script can do on its own, the better in my opinion. {{U|Dodger67|Roger}}, it's not meant to imply that reviewers are newbies or are incapable to put in the right things. Would a simple <code><nowiki><button class="clearField" title="Clear the default text"><img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2c/WikEd_clear_summary.png" alt="Clear field" /></button></nowiki></code> that clears the default text work? — <span class="nowrap">{{U|[[User:Technical 13|Technical 13]]}}</span> <sup>([[User talk:Technical 13|t]] • [[Special:EmailUser/Technical 13|e]] • [[Special:Contribs/Technical 13|c]])</sup> 21:12, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
:::T13, he's not talking about prefilled, he's talking about placeholder text that tells users *how* to fill out fields (and/or provide examples of syntax). I agree more automated prefilling would be nice, but that's not what this thread is about, unless I'm misunderstanding something... '''[[User:Theopolisme|<span style="color:#232323;">Theopolisme</span>]] <span style="color:#4F4F4F;">([[User talk:Theopolisme|<span style="color:#4F4F4F;">talk</span>]])</span>''' 21:15, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
:::* In the case that I'm misunderstanding the topic (entirely likely), there is no reason for the placeholder= text to not be there and there is no reason for it to not be specific. Not having it is discouraging and more likely to turn new reviewers away or old reviewers with memory issues or simply people that don't review often enough to keep up with the constant stream of interface changes. These texts are a very light grey (at least on my browser) and technically do nothing except remind new reviewers what is expected. — <span class="nowrap">{{U|[[User:Technical 13|Technical 13]]}}</span> <sup>([[User talk:Technical 13|t]] • [[Special:EmailUser/Technical 13|e]] • [[Special:Contribs/Technical 13|c]])</sup> 21:38, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
:I think that the placeholder for the "comment" functionality should stay: {{xt|Enter your comment about the submission using wikicode syntax. Your signature will be added automatically.}} This is useful information about *how* to comment, and should not be removed.
:I think that when declining, we should change the placeholder to: {{xt|Elaborate on your decline reason here using wikicode syntax.}} This is once again valuable information (wikicode syntax is okay), but I've removed the fluffy "clear supportive..." text.
:Thoughts on these two? '''[[User:Theopolisme|<span style="color:#232323;">Theopolisme</span>]] <span style="color:#4F4F4F;">([[User talk:Theopolisme|<span style="color:#4F4F4F;">talk</span>]])</span>''' 21:15, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
:*I don't think that the comment boxes should be filled with any text that is intended to show up - if there is default text it is likely in the template itself. I've try to ignore the sample text, but it could be confusing to new reviewers - especially since the colour of the text is only slightly lighter than active text (at least on my screen). For the first while I kept trying to delete it. Maybe the comment box, if unused, could say <NOWIKI><no comment entered></NOWIKI> or something bland like that. When reviewing I have a word processor open with the most common comments that I like to write, and I copy, paste and modify to save typing. —[[User:Anne Delong|Anne Delong]] ([[User talk:Anne Delong|talk]]) 21:27, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
:::Right, that makes sense. My worry is that users wouldn't understand that they could enter wikicode in the comments, for example, or that they were signed automatically... Placeholder text in and of itself isn't something new (see the Search box in the upper righthand corner, for example :) ). '''[[User:Theopolisme|<span style="color:#232323;">Theopolisme</span>]] <span style="color:#4F4F4F;">([[User talk:Theopolisme|<span style="color:#4F4F4F;">talk</span>]])</span>''' 21:31, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
::I've remove the fluff about being clear and supportive, since that's (to me) obviously unnecessary. We can continue to discuss other placeholders. '''[[User:Theopolisme|<span style="color:#232323;">Theopolisme</span>]] <span style="color:#4F4F4F;">([[User talk:Theopolisme|<span style="color:#4F4F4F;">talk</span>]])</span>''' 21:55, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
== Feedback about the list of decline reasons ==
| 