Version 2.0 testing feedback

TASK #4: What are your initial impressions of the tool? What stands out to you? Do you find something particularly eye-catching? Confusing? I like that it defaults to Wikisource for me but is that something that is user preference and/or something a community could decide which would be the default on its own?

TASK #5: Could you figure out how to write and style a comment in the tool's visual mode do so? What did you think of this experience? I really like writing content in VE and this reminds me of that.

TASK #6: Could you figure out how to ping someone who has commented in the section you are replying in? What did you think of this experience? I mean I guessed it was an @ sign but I don't understand why you don't make a button for that along with b, i, a, link.

TASK #7: Could you figure out how to ping someone who has not commented in the section you are replying in? What did you think of this experience? Yes but that's because you've told me it worked.

TASK #8: Could you figure out how to delete the ping you created in Task #7? What did you think of this experience?

Yes because of VE experience.

TASK #9: Could you figure out how to see the comment you were writing in the visual mode, in the source mode before posting the comment to the talk page? What – if any – part the wikitext looked different from how you expected?

Easy enough

TASK #10: Could you figure out how to post the comment you had written in Tasks #1 - #9 to the talk page?

Very straight forward

TASK #11: Does the diff you created by posting a comment look as you expected? What – if anything – were you surprised to see?

Looks about right except that if I were only in visual mode I wouldn't know that it added the sig automatically and so I could easily type the four tildes and nothing happens until I post reply when I suddenly have my signature and just four plain tildes.

OVERALL: If there are other comments or questions you would like to make the team aware of, please write them here. Barkeep49 (talk) 02:24, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@Barkeep49 – great to see you again. Thank you for giving the tool a try and sharing the feedback you had. Some follow up questions and comments below...

===Follow up questions for you===

Regarding the text input mode that is shown by default, how – if at all – do you think the preference a community has set for what full page editing interface is shown in the article name space relates to the text input mode that is shown by default in the Reply tool?

except that if I were only in visual mode I wouldn't know that it added the sig automatically and so I could easily type the four tildes and nothing happens until I post reply when I suddenly have my signature and just four plain tildes.

Typing ~~~~ in the tool's visual mode to sign the comment you were posting: is this something you did instinctively or something you did intentionally to better understand how the tool works?

In the meantime, here is a ticket for this issue: phab:T255738

===Comments===

I like that it defaults to Wikisource for me but is that something that is user preference and/or something a community could decide which would be the default on its own?

Good question. The tool currently works in the following way:

- When someone who has a preference set in Preference > Editing > Editing Mode uses the Reply tool for the first time, they will see the text input mode that matches the preference they have already set.

- When someone who does not have a preference set in Preference > Editing > Editing Mode uses the Reply tool for the first time, they will see the text input mode that the community has defined.

...the logic above is explained in detail here: phab:T250523

I really like writing content in VE and this reminds me of that.

Awesome. If there are particular things you like about the Visual mode, we would be keen to hear, but no expectation.

I mean I guessed it was an @ sign but I don't understand why you don't make a button for that along with b, i, a, link.

Good call. A button for the pinging feature has been added. You can see how it looks and works here: https://en.wikipedia.beta.wmflabs.org/wiki/Talk:Cats. PPelberg (WMF) (talk) 01:30, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

I type the four tildes out of habit. I'm discussing something so of course I'm going to sign it at the end.

The button to mention a user is a big positive. Also makes clear you can mention other people. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:37, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

I type the four tildes out of habit. I'm discussing something so of course I'm going to sign it at the end.

Simple enough. Thank you for explaining that.

The button to mention a user is a big positive. Also makes clear you can mention other people.

Excellent.

PPelberg (WMF) (talk) 01:36, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Version 2.0 testing feedback

TASK #4: What are your initial impressions of the tool? What stands out to you? Do you find something particularly eye-catching? Confusing?

It is fine. Only one negative point: I needed one big second to find where the style buttons were. I think they are too far to the right (on a large screen like mine).

TASK #5: Could you figure out how to write and style a comment in the tool's visual mode do so? What did you think of this experience?

Easily, but default mode should be "visual". Only one negative point: I needed one big second to find where the style buttons were. I think they are too far to the right (on a large screen like mine).

TASK #6: Could you figure out how to ping someone who has commented in the section you are replying in? What did you think of this experience?

Yes. Fine.

TASK #7: Could you figure out how to ping someone who has not commented in the section you are replying in? What did you think of this experience?

Yes (same way). Fine.

TASK #8: Could you figure out how to delete the ping you created in Task #7? What did you think of this experience?

Yes (click on link and then on the button to delink). Fine.

TASK #9: Could you figure out how to see the comment you were writing in the visual mode, in the source mode before posting the comment to the talk page? What – if any – part the wikitext looked different from how you expected?

Yes; it was perfect.

TASK #10: Could you figure out how to post the comment you had written in Tasks #1 - #9 to the talk page? Yes. The big blue button (not the software :P) helped. But as for the style buttons, this button is very far on the right on my screen.

TASK #11: Does the diff you created by posting a comment look as you expected? What – if anything – were you surprised to see?

Yes. Nothing.

OVERALL: If there are other comments or questions you would like to make the team aware of, please write them here. Nice tool for both beginners and experienced users. Jules* (talk) 05:21, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

hi @Jules* thank you giving the tool and try and sharing the feedback you have with us...this is helpful.

In response, a comment and question below...

Comments

I needed one big second to find where the style buttons were. I think they are too far to the right (on a large screen like mine).

The formatting tools being hard to reach seems to be a recurring patterns; I've added what you shared to the description of the task where we will consider how to make the tools easier to access while composing a comment: phab:T252445.

Questions

Easily, but default mode should be "visual"

What leads you to think this? The empirical evidence we have suggests this as well, tho I am curious to hear what is leading you to think this. PPelberg (WMF) (talk) 01:04, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi @PPelberg (WMF). Regarding your question: on Wikipedia articles, I only use Wikicode, like a lot of experienced Wikipedians, because I'm going faster with it to do formatting and add templates (I know their names and syntax, so VE is useless to me and just need more time)... and I use templates a lot ;-).

But on a talkpage:

• there is no real need to use wikicode (not much templates or avanced code to use in most cases) so VisualEditor seems to me more suitable and fast (and the ping fonctionnality with only an arobase is great);
• newcommers should land on the VisualEditor: it is really easier for them to use.

P.-S.: regarding your comment: as I am using Flow right now, I see that formatting buttons are on the bottom left of the edit box, and I find it easier to find, more ergonomic. But in most text editors like Word or LibreOffice, formatting buttons are on the top-left; that's probably what people are used to, so it may be the best location. for it.

Kind regards. Jules* (talk) 08:26, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Version 2.0 testing feedback

TASK #4: What are your initial impressions of the tool? What stands out to you? Do you find something particularly eye-catching? Confusing?

• I can't believe this took us so long to finally have this feature.
• I expected the edit window to open right under the comment that I selected to reply to, but it opened further down the page. So I asked myself whether my comment would end up further down instead.
• Will newbies understand what 'source' and 'visual' mean?

TASK #5: Could you figure out how to write and style a comment in the tool's visual mode do so? What did you think of this experience?

• Yes, but the buttons for this shouldn't be hidden on the right side of the window.

TASK #6: Could you figure out how to ping someone who has commented in the section you are replying in? What did you think of this experience?

• Yes, and this is a game changer.

TASK #7: Could you figure out how to ping someone who has not commented in the section you are replying in? What did you think of this experience?

• Also very cool, but it appears that capitalisation of usernames doesn't work yet (entering "@Foo" to ping User:Foo is displayed as "@foo").

TASK #8: Could you figure out how to delete the ping you created in Task #7? What did you think of this experience?

• Easy.

TASK #9: Could you figure out how to see the comment you were writing in the visual mode, in the source mode before posting the comment to the talk page? What – if any – part the wikitext looked different from how you expected?

• All great. Will the preview also display stuff like images and images (I didn't test that)?

TASK #10: Could you figure out how to post the comment you had written in Tasks #1 - #9 to the talk page?

• Yup.

TASK #11: Does the diff you created by posting a comment look as you expected? What – if anything – were you surprised to see?

• Maybe it should read, "reply to comment by User:Foo"? On a second thought, I suppose it should not.

OVERALL: If there are other comments or questions you would like to make the team aware of, please write them here.

• Awesomeness, keep up the great work! Gnom (talk) 12:43, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the effort you put into trying the tool and sharing these thoughts, @Gnom. Some follow up questions and comments in response to what you shared below...

===Follow up question for you===

I expected the edit window to open right under the comment that I selected to reply to, but it opened further down the page. So I asked myself whether my comment would end up further down instead.

Mmm, I see. After posting the comment you'd written to the page did it become a bit more clear to you why the edit window appeared where it did? [1]

In the meantime, I've added the experience you shared here to the ticket where we will be exploring how and where the edit window appears: phab:T254208.

---

1. I'm intentionally not sharing why the tool behaves in this way in an effort to learn whether its behavior becomes clear after use.

Will newbies understand what 'source' and 'visual' mean?

Good question. What do you think might be better name(s) for these two modes?

For context: the most recent round of usability tests we ran suggest people manage to understand/intuit what these words mean.

With this said, there was at least one tester who was confused by them to the point of being fearful clicking source would discard the comment they'd written in the visual mode. See: phab:T255085.

Yes, but the buttons for this shouldn't be hidden on the right side of the window.

Are you expressing that the writing tools (B, I, etc.) being on the right side of the text input window made them hard to "reach"?

...I ask the above to make sure I'm understanding what you experienced correctly.

By the way, here is the ticket where we are tracking the issue I described above: phab:T252445

===Comments===

...it appears that capitalisation of usernames doesn't work yet (entering "@Foo" to ping User:Foo is displayed as "@foo").

Good spot. Ticket filed: phab:T255737.

Will the preview also display stuff like images and images (I didn't test that)?

Ues, it will.

Awesomeness, keep up the great work!

^ _ ^ PPelberg (WMF) (talk) 01:06, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi @PPelberg (WMF) – thank you for your direct and detailed response, that was a great experience! It's unbelievably cool to see the feedback turn into tickets in this way.

Concerning your question, After posting the comment you'd written to the page did it become a bit more clear to you why the edit window appeared where it did?: Yes, it did become clearer. Maybe we can somehow 'visually connect' the input box with that comment that the user responding to, perhaps with a thin line on the left-hand side?

Concerning your question, What do you think might be better name(s) for these two modes?: Maybe using longer names ("use wikitext mode"/"use visual mode") is better here.

Concerning your question, Are you expressing that the writing tools (B, I, etc.) being on the right side of the text input window made them hard to "reach"?: Yes, exactly. Gnom (talk) 19:24, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Version 2.0 testing feedback

TASK #4: What are your initial impressions of the tool? What stands out to you? Do you find something particularly eye-catching? Confusing?

1.Too wide - better to have a hide/show mechanism for the indentations. Table of content is good to see the topics but could then develop 1 by one or all levels according to what i search. 2.Difficult to see where I have replied; may be a light color could be used in background to isolate where are my lines.

TASK #5: Could you figure out how to write and style a comment in the tool's visual mode do so? What did you think of this experience?

ok, natural way; no remark.

TASK #6: Could you figure out how to ping someone who has commented in the section you are replying in? What did you think of this experience?

Ping for me is 'are you there ?' - what use is it here, I dont know. So I search in the doc. I found ping is a template. Using {{ , i discovered templates can be inserted in the response but it seems this is not the solution. Then I discover '@' i could use as a shortcut for 'user:' . May be this was requested ? ...

TASK #7: Could you figure out how to ping someone who has not commented in the section you are replying in? What did you think of this experience?

I use the same way with '@' on an IP address.

TASK #8: Could you figure out how to delete the ping you created in Task #7? What did you think of this experience?

I cannot delete a line of response - so a ping -. (apart from the edit tab)

TASK #9: Could you figure out how to see the comment you were writing in the visual mode, in the source mode before posting the comment to the talk page? What – if any – part the wikitext looked different from how you expected?

ok show preview - is standard; no remark.

TASK #10: Could you figure out how to post the comment you had written in Tasks #1 - #9 to the talk page?

use corresponding button; no remark

TASK #11: Does the diff you created by posting a comment look as you expected? What – if anything – were you surprised to see?

no surprise.

OVERALL: If there are other comments or questions you would like to make the team aware of, please write them here.

1. How can I correct a previous comment I have emitted ? impossible via editor

2. there is a risk on indentation alignment (?) to keep the possibility of allowing direct source 'modify' via the top tab or 'section modify'.

3. if too many blocks are embedded we do not recognise to which subject the answer was addressed to (again show/hide mecanism would be welcomed).

4.(added August,1 2020) => is there an easy way to attach documents on the flow ? Sometimes discussions end with 'please send me your screenshot' - naturally you would click on the file and drag/drop it on the discussion frame to make it attached.

[end] Christian 🇫🇷 FR 🚨 (talk) 14:00, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

This feedback is helpful – thank you for taking the time to try the prototype and to share what you think about it, @Wladek92.

Below are some comments and questions that came to mind after reading the feedback you shared above.

Comments

Then I discover '@' i could use as a shortcut for 'user:' . May be this was requested ? ...

Exactly...we were wondering whether people would try typing the @ sign to trigger the feature without there being an icon for it. It sounds like there not being an icon created some confusion for you [and others].

As such, we will be introducing an icon for this. That work is happening in this ticket: phab:T254366.

Out of curiosity: what do you think of the icon used for mentioning in this discussion system? It looks like "+👤".

> wlad => its ok, logical use; 'add a user' is in the top right corner

1. How can I correct a previous comment I have emitted ? impossible via editor

Currently, you will need to use the full page editor to edit the comment you posted.

We have explored introducing functionality for editing specific comments, but this has not yet been implemented nor do we have plans to add this functionality in the near-term. This task has more information: phab: T245225.

> wlad => opening the editor is dangerous: if i bring back some snippet with markup inside (see my try with '==') I can break the indentation

3. if too many blocks are embedded we do not recognise to which subject the answer was addressed to (again show/hide mecanism would be welcomed).

Definitely. We will be exploring what visual changes can be made to make it easier to read and understand conversations. I've added the comments you shared to the task where we are gathering research: phab: T249579.

If there are other issues you've encountered using talk pages, we would value hearing them!

> wlad => ok, please keep me informed when some mokeup are available

Questions

Too wide...

Can you share a bit more here? What did you notice being more difficult because of the width of the Reply tool's text input area? Are the text formatting tools harder to "reach"? Something else?

> wlad => observe there is a horizontal lift bar at the bottom of the page. Push it right forward and lift up/down the page to see my 'eeeeeee' text appear. If the text exceeds the width of the screen, it would be nice to have it indented and continuing on the next line of the reply. That means that each reply should be contained in a kind of message box to be able to see the list of other replies. Dynamic of resizing the page respects its contents.

Also, do you recall how large the browser window was when you were trying the tool?

> wlad => 1280x800 but not important, if boxes are implemented

In the meantime, I've added this comment to the ticket where we are collecting feedback about how the tool looks and behaves: phab: T254208

...better to have a hide/show mechanism for the indentations

Can you describe this in a bit more detail? Are you suggesting the indentation marks be made visible in the tool's visual mode? If so, why do you think they should be shown?

> wlad => the idea is to use a hierarchical tree (something like on translatewiki discussions ex: https://translatewiki.net/wiki/MediaWiki_talk:Fileimporter-filenameerror-illegal/fr#Invalider%E2%80%A6_invalide_57975). Take the text around 'This is a Reply for testing...'. I add a '+' if the node holds responses. I add a '-' if there is no reply. By default the full page is shown. At least each node has a topic. You click '+' to develop the sub levels and - to hide them. Thus the view may become :

   +This is a Reply for testing the discussion tool. I'm liking it. Though it still uses description list elements in HTML. Regards, 94.217.145.185 (talk) 20:31, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
   -Tis is a reply to user 213.245.48.203 (talk) 20:19, 8 April 2020 (UTC) Wladek92 (talk) 12:52, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Or after some manipulations by the reader :

   -This is a Reply for testing the discussion tool. I'm liking it. Though it still uses description list elements in HTML. Regards, 94.217.145.185 (talk) 20:31, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
       +Making a change doesn't seem to work. "Go back in" from [2] should work like how? 94.217.145.185 (talk) 20:35, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
   -نصّ باللغة العربية
    English text.
    Big brother...
    What else? So pinging @Google123 and ساسوكي Dyolf77 testing 02
    Thanks. -- Dyolf77 TEST (talk) 22:22, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
       +Just pinging Arabic character user name: @ساسو Dyolf77 TEST (talk) 22:24, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
       -Hello @Dyolf77 TEST! Happy to see you there. @Colin August do you want to test this tool? 90.90.16.67 (talk) 05:10, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
           -Hey @Barkeep49 (no ping)! 90.90.16.67 (talk) 05:12, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
               +Text written with source editor:
                Writing a list:
                    item 1
                    item 2 Dyolf77 TEST (talk) 13:56, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]                       
   -Tis is a reply to user 213.245.48.203 (talk) 20:19, 8 April 2020 (UTC) Wladek92 (talk) 12:52, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Difficult to see where I have replied; may be a light color could be used in background to isolate where are my lines.

Are you referring to it not being clear where your comment has been posted to the page immediately after clicking "Reply"? If so, did you notice the yellow highlight that appears after the comment you've written is published to the page? See image below...

> wlad => yes you are right but the color disapears. Come one week later to check the responses: there is no more color on the page. So I search again: CtrlF etc ...

I cannot delete a line of response - so a ping -. (apart from the edit tab)...

Do you remember whether you tried deleting the ping before or after you had published the comment you were drafting?

> wlad => all with ping is ok; I was just meaning that an option is missing to say 'delete my comment'

2. there is a risk on indentation alignment (?) to keep the possibility of allowing direct source 'modify' via the top tab or 'section modify'.

Before responding, I want to make sure I am understanding what you are saying...are you saying there is a risk the tool could incorrectly indent the comment and therefore, there should be an easy way to edit the level at which a comment is indented? Are you saying something else entirely?

> wlad => this is related to '1. How can I correct a previous comment' where I speak of the danger to made the editor available (introducing of '==' tags) PPelberg (WMF) (talk) 00:34, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Version 2.0 testing feedback

TASK #4: What are your initial impressions of the tool? What stands out to you? Do you find something particularly eye-catching? Confusing?

• Too many simmilar links that I have to actually read in order to check which is a signature and which is the "reply" button.
• Too much indentation, needs overflow in narrow screens. Wiki users actually break a discussion when indentation makes it difficult to follow. ( en:Template:Outdent and en:Template:Outdent2 ). Actually I do like the Structered Dicussions limit of indented reply that prevents discussions to escallate on 1vs1 and keep them on the initial subject.

TASK #5: Could you figure out how to write and style a comment in the tool's visual mode do so? What did you think of this experience?

Yea, ok, no problem.

TASK #6: Could you figure out how to ping someone who has commented in the section you are replying in? What did you think of this experience?

Well, since there is no button (and why are they on another side?) there is NO way to know how to ping unless you already know the template.

I now see in other comments that you just have to type "@" (as in Structured Discussions). Nice, but I did not figure it the first time as there is no hint about that (and surely new users will not have a hint at all except if they are Facebook users). It should be in the toolbar as it will be more common than styling markup and will give a hint about the availability of the function.

TASK #7: Could you figure out how to ping someone who has not commented in the section you are replying in? What did you think of this experience?

Well, since there is no button (and why are they on another side?) there is NO way to know how to ping unless you already know the template.

I now see in other comments that you just have to type "@" (as in Structured Discussions). Nice, but I did not figure it the first time as there is no hint about that (and surely new users will not have a hint at all except if they are Facebook users). It should be in the toolbar as it will be more common than styling markup and will give a hint about the availability of the function.

TASK #8: Could you figure out how to delete the ping you created in Task #7? What did you think of this experience?

Yes, I do, it is easy before I publsh. After I publish, I need to edit the section (if that was the question).

TASK #9: Could you figure out how to see the comment you were writing in the visual mode, in the source mode before posting the comment to the talk page? What – if any – part the wikitext looked different from how you expected?

Yes, everything's fine.

TASK #10: Could you figure out how to post the comment you had written in Tasks #1 - #9 to the talk page?

Yes, it is ok.

(Note: putting the buttons on the right side, means that the physical distance between my two-three words comment and the publish button is 42cm on a 24' screen (disregarding that this is also the width of the edit form :-p).

TASK #11: Does the diff you created by posting a comment look as you expected? What – if anything – were you surprised to see?

Not the source (except the lack of blank lines before and after the post.

It seems that the edit summary defaults to "→‎Section: Reply". Not useful.

OVERALL: If there are other comments or questions you would like to make the team aware of, please write them here.

• Most users leave at least one blank line between comments. The only reason a user would not leave a blank line is if the comment is more personal and not about the main subject of the discussion.
• If I want to edit/correct something in my comment and work in WikiEditor, the fact that there are no blank lines between individual comments makes the source cluttered. This will annoy users whether they do use the reply tool or not...

(Talk:Talk pages project/Replying/2020/04#h-No_blank_lines?-2020-04-14T08:07:00.000Z) Geraki (talk) 08:23, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Version 2.0 testing feedback

TASK #4: What are your initial impressions of the tool? What stands out to you? Do you find something particularly eye-catching? Confusing?

1. First impression is "What happened"? When clicking "Reply", the link suddenly dissappears (which is an unexpected behavior for clicking a link) and the tool interface appears too quickly and abruptly. I would expect that a large element like this would have a fade-in animation. It is custormary to show a yellow background color quickly fading to white to represent elements that appear in a page and change their surroundings layout. (P.S: Heck, you do that same animation when you finally post the comment. Why not also when the tool appears?)
2. Second impression is "Where am I"? When clicking a post that has several earlier replies, the interface jumps down and the tool apears in the middle of a completely different conversation, in a new context with no visual indication of its relation to the initial comment we're replying to.
3. The large yellow box saying "You are not logged in" is easy to spot. The copyright notice right below it, not so much. Wikipedia puts a very important emphasis on its unusual copyright notice, and this notice is way too easy to overlook. Moreover, it is left-aligned, and the Reply button is to the right, so the notice is not even near the point of the interface where it is relevant.

TASK #5: Could you figure out how to write and style a comment in the tool's visual mode do so? What did you think of this experience?

The tool is simple to use and does its job.

1. It's a bit weird that clicking "big" makes the text bigger, but clicking it again makes it smaller, by way of disabling the "big" font. I expected to make it still bigger.
2. I know that the "Visual" and "Code" keywords respectively correspond to WYSIWYG and wiki editors, but I'm not sure that they are a good fit to their purpose in this interface. Descriptions like "Styles" and "plain code" would be more universally understood, I think, and they would better fit the limited expectations of writing a single comment in a thread, as well as the limited tool functions. This is not the full-blown Visual editor of Wikipedia articles.

TASK #6: Could you figure out how to ping someone who has commented in the section you are replying in? What did you think of this experience?

I have no clue how to do that. I can't find a "ping" button in any of the menus, and clicking on someones's name navigates to their user page. (At least the message draft is not lost when navigating back. Good thing!)

TASK #7: Could you figure out how to ping someone who has not commented in the section you are replying in? What did you think of this experience?

Same as above, I can't find how to do that.

TASK #8: Could you figure out how to delete the ping you created in Task #7? What did you think of this experience?

Same as above, I can't find how to do that.

TASK #9: Could you figure out how to see the comment you were writing in the visual mode, in the source mode before posting the comment to the talk page? What – if any – part the wikitext looked different from how you expected?

Changing between Visual and Code is intuitive, and the noticeable delay is not too bad even for a large post.

TASK #10: Could you figure out how to post the comment you had written in Tasks #1 - #9 to the talk page?

Yes, though for a very long comment written in the Code section, the Reply button goes out of sight, pushed far down the page by the Preview panel, which is weird. I'm undecided between liking that it forces you to scroll down through all your message again to review it, or the fact that the button is missing when you want to press it.

I like that, if you press Cancel, it scrolls you up back where you started.

TASK #11: Does the diff you created by posting a comment look as you expected? What – if anything – were you surprised to see?

I'm surprised that the result is quite normal. :-) Good indentation, simple code. Well done.

I also hadn't seen before the Edit quality tool. Adding comments to the comments? Seems intriguing, and quite meta.

OVERALL: If there are other comments or questions you would like to make the team aware of, please write them here.

Good tool, simple to use, it's good for what it's made for.

P.S. Hey, why does this current box where I'm writing have a Replace tool, and the Reply tool hasn't? I hadn't missed it 'till I saw this one ;-) Diego Moya (talk) 18:17, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to test the tool and write up the impressions and feedback you have, @Diego Moya.

Some comments and follow up questions below...

===Comments===

When clicking "Reply", the link suddenly dissappears (which is an unexpected behavior for clicking a link) and the tool interface appears too quickly and abruptly. I would expect that a large element like this would have a fade-in animation

Here's a ticket for this issue: phab:T255086

Second impression is "Where am I"? When clicking a post that has several earlier replies, the interface jumps down and the tool appears in the middle of a completely different conversation, in a new context with no visual indication of its relation to the initial comment we're replying to.

"Where am I"? That's a great way of describing this issue. I've added the feedback you shared to the ticket where we will be thinking through this issue. Please comment on the ticket if you think anything could be made more clear: phab:T254208#6213234

It's a bit weird that clicking "big" makes the text bigger, but clicking it again makes it smaller, by way of disabling the "big" font. I expected to make it still bigger.

Ah, it sounds like you expect the big icon to function as if there are a range of text sizes, when in reality, it is a binary: big or not big. Here's a ticket for that one: phab:T254420.

I know that the "Visual" and "Code" keywords respectively correspond to WYSIWYG and wiki editors, but I'm not sure that they are a good fit to their purpose in this interface. Descriptions like "Styles" and "plain code" would be more universally understood, I think, and they would better fit the limited expectations of writing a single comment in a thread, as well as the limited tool functions. This is not the full-blown Visual editor of Wikipedia articles.

This is a wonderful point. I've created a ticket for this and added a follow up question for you on the ticket which can be found here: phab:T255085.

I have no clue how to do that. I can't find a "ping" button in any of the menus, and clicking on someones's name navigates to their user page. (At least the message draft is not lost when navigating back. Good thing!)

We hear you on this. We will be adding a visual indication that will, hopefully, make it more clear to people this functionality exists and how to use it. Here is the ticket where the work to implement this will happen: phab:T254366.

Changing between Visual and Code is intuitive, and the noticeable delay is not too bad even for a large post.

This is nice to hear.

for a very long comment written in the Code section, the Reply button goes out of sight, pushed far down the page by the Preview panel,

Good spot. I've added this issue to the description of the task where we will be thinking, holistically, about the behavior of the tool. Here is that ticket: phab:T254208#6213234.

Please comment there if you think the way I've represented the issue you surfaced could be more clear and/or complete.

I'm surprised that the result is quite normal. :-) Good indentation, simple code. Well done.

The team will be encouraged to hear this ^ _ ^

P.S. Hey, why does this current box where I'm writing have a Replace tool, and the Reply tool hasn't? I hadn't missed it 'till I saw this one ;-)

This is the first time I'm thinking about the "Replace" tool in this context...can you share when you would need/expect to use the "Replace" tool in the context of commenting on a talk page?

===Follow up questions===

The copyright notice right below it, not so much. Wikipedia puts a very important emphasis on its unusual copyright notice, and this notice is way too easy to overlook...

Are you able to share a link or screenshot that shows where you think the copyright notice is presented in a more obvious way? PPelberg (WMF) (talk) 00:56, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Ah, it sounds like you expect the big icon to function as if there are a range of text sizes, when in reality, it is a binary: big or not big.

Exactly, and the icons with an "up" arrow and "down" arrow contributed a lot to that expectation. Microsoft Word has almost identical icons that do repeatedly increase or decrease the current size of the selected text.

For options that represent a fixed size, I would expect a list representing the range of all the available font sizes (big, normal, small, exra-big, extra-small), and no switch-on, switch-off effect (selecting the same option twice would simply re-apply the selected size without any effect).

This is the first time I'm thinking about the "Replace" tool in this context...can you share when you would need/expect to use the "Replace" tool in the context of commenting on a talk page?

I hadn't thought it much when I wrote that comment. It's just that whenever I spend time writing a long, elaborate answer, I end up missing a full editor (undo/redo is a usual suspect often missing from mobile interfaces, and Replace has its uses when re-styling wikitext format codes).

Wikipedia comments are particularly prone to that problem: talk pages being an asynchronous bulleting board, and given the level and depth of discourse, its comments often require a composition effort that simpler online chat tools don't need.

Now, a visual tool and dedicated editor with the content of a simple comment (not the whole section) could somewhat reduce the need of a more potent tool. But I too often find myself transferring my comment drafts from Wikipedia's edit box to an external full-featured text editor for composition.

Are you able to share a link or screenshot that shows where you think the copyright notice is presented in a more obvious way?

There aren't many websites that put so much emphasis on the copyright attribution of the written comments. Here I would expect a large icon near the reply button to represent the rights being transferred to the Wikipedia community.

Fortunately, Creative Commons have developed exactly such icons - simply placing the CC BY-SA 3.0 icons close to the Reply button could be enough to draw the user's attention to the copyright note. Diego Moya (talk) 17:38, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Version 2.0 testing feedback

TASK #1: On a desktop computer ...

I'm perverse, I tried it on a tablet in desktop web (not available in mobile web 🙁 )

TASK #2: Find the section heading, "How can we make this article better?"

Currently there are two, but okay, it probably won’t matter which one I choose...

TASK #4: What are your initial impressions of the tool? What stands out to you? Do you find something particularly eye-catching? Confusing?

The colours are funny ... no, that’s just because we don’t have a proper dark/night theme and I’m using system-level invert. Changed colour back to daytime.

The u-shaped boxing around “Source” is unusual. Not confusing, I can tell which option is selected.^†

Not-logged-in warning is prominent.

Reply button is disabled. Stays disabled if I enter only space characters (good). Becomes enabled once I type non-whitespace (expected). Preview is a bit slow (not surprising on Beta). Hint text was “Reply to Wladek” which reinforces the meaning of the indent. I’m still in Source mode at this stage.

† On iPad Safari iOS 12, Visual has a thin vertical border on the left but not right when selected. Switching back to Source, the side borders are gone. No stray borders in Firefox or Edgium on Windows.

TASK #5: Could you figure out how to write and style a comment in the tool's visual mode do so? What did you think of this experience?

Yes, no problems with inline styling via toolbar. Like with VE and SD, I can set italic using the iOS context menu, which is a nice touch.

Magic character combinations like [[ and {{ do the same as "normal" VE; probably getting ahead of things here.

I haven't used Language formatting in VE before. Was surprised how it behaved if I chose that from the toolbar with no text pre-selected.

TASK #6: Could you figure out how to ping someone who has commented in the section you are replying in? What did you think of this experience?

Only figured it out because I’ve tested the @-mention feature previously, otherwise I would have been lost. Probably would have inserted a {{U }} template by hand otherwise.

Noticed that I get the same style pop-up in Visual mode as in Source mode, rather than the SD-style mention box. Good that it's consistent across both views.

TASK #7: Could you figure out how to ping someone who has not commented in the section you are replying in? What did you think of this experience?

Hmm, i n t e r e s t I n g ... [I need to head off to work, will come back and complete this... 07:56 AEST.]

[Back, on a desktop PC now (11:00 AEST).]

I happened to pick a user whose name starts with a different letter. Initially I typed quickly, then later retried more slowly. With fewer than 4 letters, it sometimes autocompletes and sometimes not. Seems to depend on whether the drop-down is already open, e.g. if I get to 4 letters, activate the completion, then backspace to fewer letters it finds extra matches.

TASK #8: Could you figure out how to delete the ping you created in Task #7? What did you think of this experience?

I used Ctrl+Shift+Leftarrrow to try to select the whole word then press backspace or delete. Sometimes it selects the containing blue box (for want of a better word) and pops up the Link card, in that case Backspace just dismisses the popup. Other times it selects the text inside the box and I can delete that. Have to delete the "@" separately as that is just decoration now. If I Shift+Arrow in one letter at a time, or mouse-drag, then the progressive selection is less unintuitive. Double-click to word-select is fine. Touch-screen would be more fiddly.

TASK #9: Could you figure out how to see the comment you were writing in the visual mode, in the source mode before posting the comment to the talk page? What – if any – part the wikitext looked different from how you expected?

Wikitext displays with a single line break even though that would normally run-on instead of creating a paragraph break ... oh, of course, it's a <dd> not a para and the :::: are implied. Most inline formatting is as expected, though I didn't try any funky combinations of overlapping bold and italics.

The text I marked as French displayed an attribute href=something...ppelberg-test — see task #11 below.

TASK #10: Could you figure out how to post the comment you had written in Tasks #1 - #9 to the talk page?

Yes.

TASK #11: Does the diff you created by posting a comment look as you expected? What – if anything – were you surprised to see?

I would like to be able to customize the edit summary. History list has a page full of "Reply".

Initially, apart from the JADE edit quality, no surprises with the diff. I was already expecting that the colons or bullets would be added, and already aware that the ping would be a normal wikilink and not a template.

But I see this in edit-source (different edit from the first diff I looked at):

:::''x''<sup>2</sup> + ''y''<sup href="Special:Contributions/10.0.3.1">2</sup> = ''h''<sup>2</sup>
:::
:::<small>Mumble, mumble, mumble.</small>
:::
:::<span lang="fr" dir="ltr" href="User talk:Ppelberg-test">Ça plane pour moir</span>. I probably misspelt that.

See diff 426998!

OVERALL: If there are other comments or questions you would like to make the team aware of, please write them here.

When this is all over, could you delete the history with the IP addresses, please? Pelagic (talk) 21:57, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Hmm, that post was formatted fine in preview, but now it's messed-up.

Edit: and after posting this reply it's formatted again.

Edit2: displays fine from https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Talk_pages_project/replying just not when the ?preloadtitle...etc is present in the URL. Pelagic (talk) 00:13, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Version 2.0 testing feedback

TASK #4: What are your initial impressions of the tool? What stands out to you? Do you find something particularly eye-catching? Confusing?

It's easy to understand.

TASK #5: Could you figure out how to write and style a comment in the tool's visual mode do so? What did you think of this experience?

I understand how to do so but the drop-down menu for the formattings should only have an arrow or a … icon and an arrow because it's not for all formattings but for more formattings.

TASK #6: Could you figure out how to ping someone who has commented in the section you are replying in? What did you think of this experience?

First I did not understand how to do this. Then I guessed that I have to type an @ and it was right. This might be more confusing to existing than to new users because new users know how to ping users in internet forums and can do the same here but existing users know that @Username is not enough to ping someone. There needs to be a text that informs about this feature.

TASK #7: Could you figure out how to ping someone who has not commented in the section you are replying in? What did you think of this experience?

It's not more difficult than TASK #6.

TASK #8: Could you figure out how to delete the ping you created in Task #7? What did you think of this experience?

Yes, you just put the cursor at the end of the ping and press backspace unitll the ping is deleted, right?

# 8.5:

Changing the username will not change the pinged user but the displayed username, same problem as when changing birth dates users often forget to change the link target.

TASK #9: Could you figure out how to see the comment you were writing in the visual mode, in the source mode before posting the comment to the talk page? What – if any – part the wikitext looked different from how you expected?

It looked like expected.

TASK #10: Could you figure out how to post the comment you had written in Tasks #1 - #9 to the talk page?

Yes

TASK #11: Does the diff you created by posting a comment look as you expected? What – if anything – were you surprised to see?

The example picture broke it

TASK #12:

Yes

OVERALL: If there are other comments or questions you would like to make the team aware of, please write them here. FF-11 (talk) 08:01, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

We appreciate you giving the new tool a try and sharing the feedback you have with us here, @FF-11.

Some follow up questions and comments for you below...

===Follow up questions===

The example picture broke it

Are you able to share a link to the "example picture" you tried posting? Also, when you "broke" are you able to describe in a bit more detail what you saw happen?

I understand how to do so but the drop-down menu for the formattings should only have an arrow or a … icon and an arrow because it's not for all formattings but for more formattings.

Interesting...can you think of another tool/interface that you think does a good job communicating this "more formattings" point?

===Comments===

First I did not understand how to do this. Then I guessed that I have to type an @ and it was right. This might be more confusing to existing than to new users because new users know how to ping users in internet forums and can do the same here but existing users know that @Username is not enough to ping someone.

You described this clearly. Ideally, the icon we are adding to the toolbar will help make the pinging feature easier for existing editors to understand. Here is the ticket where this work will happen: phab:T254366.

Yes, you just put the cursor at the end of the ping and press backspace unitll the ping is deleted, right?

Exactly. Not a trick question :)

Changing the username will not change the pinged user but the displayed username, same problem as when changing birth dates users often forget to change the link target.

Good call. To avoid the scenario you described (a link's target and text getting "out of sync), we will be making an adjustment to what is presented when user links in the Reply tool's visual mode are selected. You can see what we have in mind here: phab:T252083. PPelberg (WMF) (talk) 01:05, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

The example picture broke it

The example picture File:Example.jpg that was inserted by someone else in the page before I did the test. Because of it the comments by Geraki, me (I'm still using my old username Honischboy on the beta cluster), 82.197.207.202, Ppelberg-test and Sivaraam are not correctly indented. This is not the tools fault but it doesn't look the way it should be.

I understand how to do so but the drop-down menu for the formattings should only have an arrow or a … icon and an arrow because it's not for all formattings but for more formattings.

The toolbar in the beta looks like this:

|<figure-inline class="mw-default-size"></figure-inline>

|<figure-inline class="mw-default-size"></figure-inline>

|<figure-inline class="mw-default-size"></figure-inline>

|<figure-inline></figure-inline>

|<figure-inline class="mw-default-size"></figure-inline>

|}

But I would use this design:

|<figure-inline class="mw-default-size"></figure-inline>

|<figure-inline class="mw-default-size"></figure-inline>

|<figure-inline class="mw-default-size"></figure-inline>

|<figure-inline></figure-inline>

|<figure-inline class="mw-default-size"></figure-inline>

|}

or that design:

|<figure-inline class="mw-default-size"></figure-inline>

|<figure-inline class="mw-default-size"></figure-inline>

|<figure-inline class="mw-default-size"></figure-inline>

|<figure-inline class="mw-default-size"></figure-inline>

|}

because <figure-inline class="mw-default-size"></figure-inline> means "[all] formattings"/"[all] text styles" and <figure-inline class="mw-default-size"></figure-inline> means "more" FF-11 (talk) 19:15, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

To add to FF-11's suggestion of possible toolbar design, could <figure-inline class="mw-default-size"></figure-inline> be added next to <figure-inline class="mw-default-size"></figure-inline>? Strikethrough tends to be used very often in discussions. Tenryuu (talk) 18:27, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

V2 Feedback: Kaartic

phab:T255738: Make it clear in the visual mode comments will be automatically signed phab:T255560: Make reply links more discoverable phab:T255737: Username suggestion list lowercases text input phab:T252083: Treat links to user pages differently than normal wikilinks phab: T254208: Revise position and behavior of Reply tool's text input phab:T248594: Refine design of ConfirmEdit captcha workflow in DiscussionTools phab:T255740: Template swallows other parts of comment

Version 2.0 testing feedback

TASK #4: What are your initial impressions of the tool? What stands out to you? Do you find something particularly eye-catching? Confusing? The in-line editing window looks great! I really like and the seamless switch between the text and the visual editor. The positioning and styling of the "Reply" links look a little odd, though. It would be nice if it could be a little more distinguished from the actual text possibly by italicizing it or something like that. TASK #5: Could you figure out how to write and style a comment in the tool's visual mode do so? What did you think of this experience? Yeah, that works nicely. The expected shortcuts work for styling. I love that Ctrl+K is mapped to adding links! TASK #6: Could you figure out how to ping someone who hascommented in the section you are replying in? What did you think of this experience? Yeah, it's easy to do that. I type '@' and it shows a list of people who have already commented there. Nice. TASK #7: Could you figure out how to ping someone who has notcommented in the section you are replying in? What did you think of this experience? Yeah, this is easy to do too. I just type @followed by the username of the person who hasn't yet commented there and hit enter. It even seems to be showing suggestions as and when I type. Nice. I noticed one issue. In some cases it seems to automatically lower-casing the first character of the username. For example, I was trying to ping the 'Acct creation test 030' user. I typed in 'Acct creation test 03' the suggestions went away. Then I just continued typing the last character ('0') and hit space. I was shown 'acct creation test 030' (note the lower-case 'a') as a suggestion. I hit enter. The suggestion was used and the first character of the username got lower-cased. Not sure why the suggestion shows a username where the first character is lower-cased. TASK #8: Could you figure out how to delete the ping you created in Task #7? What did you think of this experience? I just hit backspace until the username was deleted. So, it's nice and works fine. TASK #9: Could you figure out how to see the comment you were writing in the visual mode, in the source mode before posting the comment to the talk page? What – if any – part the wikitext looked different from how you expected? Yeah, switching to the "Source" tab revealed the wiki-text. The wikitext looked like what I expected in most cases. For the ping, I thought the ping template might be used but the user page was linked. I think it makes sense to link to the user page. TASK #10: Could you figure out how to post the comment you had written in Tasks #1 - #9 to the talk page? Yeah. Ctrl+Enter works! Cool. TASK #11: Does the diff you created by posting a comment look as you expected? What – if anything – were you surprised to see? Yes. It looks good. I forgot to add the signature to the comment possibly due to my infrequency of replying in talk pages. It's nice to see the signature automatically added. Also, it's great to see that it respects custom signatures. It might be nice to show a hint somewhere that the message would be auto-signed. OVERALL: If there are other comments or questions you would like to make the team aware of, please write them here. A few things:

1. It would be nice to visually distinguish the editor so that it is easily identifiable amongst the content while scrolling through the page. When drafting a reply, I happened to scroll the page to see other content but lost track of the location of the editor. It took me some time to find this. Given that the positioning of the editor could vary unlike the editors in other places, I guess it would be nice to visually distinguish this in a better way so that it could easily be identified.
2. When I try to post a reply after a few minutes, I got a request to complete CAPTCHA. The comment got posted after I completed the CAPTCHA but it's not clear why the CAPTCHA was necessary. It would be nice if the reason is mentioned somewhere.

Apart from these, I noticed a issue when using the '{{quote}}' template. Consider the following wikitext which has been entered in the "Source" editor:

Lorem
Ipsum
{{quote|Quoted text}}
More text

Now, each time I switch to the 'Visual' editor and then back to 'Source', I see that each line of text before the quote template gets prefixed with ':'. So, the text looks like this after the first switch:

:Lorem
:Ipsum
:{{quote|Quoted text}}
More text

It looks like this after the second switch:

::Lorem
::Ipsum
::{{quote|Quoted text}}
More text

That doesn't look right, does it? Kaartic^[talk] 20:17, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Curious. I now consistently see the following error when I try to reply to any comment in that page:

The "Reply" link cannot be used to reply to this comment. To reply, please use the full page editor by clicking "Edit source".

It doesn't say why. Not sure what's going on. Kaartic ^[talk] 20:25, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

This feedback is helpful - we appreciate the effort you've put into trying the tool and sharing these thoughts with us, @Kaartic. Some comments in response to what you shared below...

===Follow up questions===

It might be nice to show a hint somewhere that the message would be auto-signed.

Can you imagine how you might react if you had included ~~~~ in the comment you were writing and after posting, noticed that it had been auto-signed this making ~~~~ unnecessary?

In the meantime, I've added this feedback to the ticket where we are tracking this issue: phab:T255738.

===Comments===

The in-line editing window looks great! I really like and the seamless switch between the text and the visual editor.

We're glad to hear this!

The positioning and styling of the "Reply" links look a little odd, though. It would be nice if it could be a little more distinguished from the actual text possibly by italicizing it or something like that.

Well put. This is proving to be a common issue. We plan to address this as part of our larger effort to make the actions, activity and content within talk pages easier to idenitfy and understand.

In the meantime, I've added the feedback you shared to the ticket where we will think specifically about the discoverability of the "Reply" links: phab:T255560.

I noticed one issue. In some cases it seems to automatically lower-casing the first character of the username.

Good observation. I've added the comments you shared to the ticket where we will be investigating this: phab:T255737.

I think it makes sense to link to the user page.

This is good to hear. If you're curious, here is how we arrived at the current approach and the enhancements we have planned for it: phab:T252083.

It would be nice to visually distinguish the editor so that it is easily identifiable amongst the content while scrolling through the page. When drafting a reply, I happened to scroll the page to see other content but lost track of the location of the editor. It took me some time to find this. Given that the positioning of the editor could vary unlike the editors in other places, I guess it would be nice to visually distinguish this in a better way so that it could easily be identified.

Well put. I've added this feedback to the ticket where we will be exploring how to address this issue: phab: T254208#6233879.

When I try to post a reply after a few minutes, I got a request to complete CAPTCHA. The comment got posted after I completed the CAPTCHA but it's not clear why the CAPTCHA was necessary. It would be nice if the reason is mentioned somewhere.

Agreed. The tool should explain what prompted the CAPTCHA to be shown. I've posted this to the ticket where we have been discussing CAPTCHA: phab:T248594#6233882.

...Apart from these, I noticed a issue when using the '{{quote}} template. Consider the following wikitext which has been entered in the "Source" editor...

Thank you for bringing this example to our attention. In investigating the switching issue you raised (filed as: phab:T255742), I seem to have stumbled upon another issue:phab:T255740 (Template swallows other parts of comment). PPelberg (WMF) (talk) 02:55, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Can you imagine how you might react if you had included ~~~~ in the comment you were writing and after posting, noticed that it had been auto-signed this making ~~~~

I would realize that it's not necessary to sign the replies done using this interface anymore and would stop doing so. I would also remove the unnecessary signature in that post.

Though I personally don't find it confusing. I could imagine how this exceptional auto-signing behaviour might be confusing to some. But in "Source" mode, the preview of the reply does a good job of communicating that the reply would be auto-signed. In "Visual" mode this still needs to be communicated.

I also wonder if this auto-signing might be found as a "weird"/"unnecessary" behaviour by people who have been interacting a lot in talk pages. I'm not an experienced editor myself to say that. Anyways, if the experienced editors were to use this, I anticipate them asking for a preference to turn this auto-signing off ;-)

Thanks for the detailed responses, by the way. Totally love them :-) Kaartic ^[talk] 18:48, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

I would realize that it's not necessary to sign the replies done using this interface anymore and would stop doing so. I would also remove the unnecessary signature in that post.

Understood. This is helpful to know.

in "Source" mode, the preview of the reply does a good job of communicating that the reply would be auto-signed. In "Visual" mode this still needs to be communicated.

I suspect this issue, and the initial approach to resolving it, will be the kinds of things that become more clear once more people use the tool.

Considering many experienced contributors trying the tool for the first time will land in the tool's source mode, I wonder if the presence of the preview will "teach" them the tool will automatically sign the comments they post, as you alluded to.

The thing I wonder about: will this group of people assume the tool will continue auto-signing posts if they post the comment they are writing in the tool's visual mode.

I also wonder if this auto-signing might be found as a "weird"/"unnecessary" behaviour by people who have been interacting a lot in talk pages.

We'll have to see...

Thanks for the detailed responses, by the way. Totally love them :-)

You bet and thank you for saying as much – that's nice to hear ^ _ ^ PPelberg (WMF) (talk) 01:34, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

We'll have to see...

Yeah. In the mean time, I think I figured out a reason why they might find it "weird". So far, the source editor had the "what you write is what gets published" phenomenon. As a matter of fact, even I really love the fact that I have control over what gets published. The automatic signing of messages kind of goes against this. So, this could come up as a reason why people might not like this. Just wanted to share this. :) Kaartic ^[talk] 16:12, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Notify the user you are replying to

The reply box currently starts by saying "Reply to USERNAME" before I type anything, which (based on how other platforms work) seems to imply that USERNAME will be tagged in the reply. Would it be possible to add a "Notify USERNAME" checkbox next to the "Watch this page" one that would add {{Reply to|USERNAME}} (or whatever the local wiki's equivalent is) to the start of the reply? It should probably default to unchecked to avoid generating a flood of notifications. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 17:19, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Enabling as a beta feature

Hello! Some users have shown interest in enabling this tool as a beta feature on Serbian Wikipedia. Are you planning to expand the tools to new wikis? We would be glad to be among the first projects to test this tool :)) Aca (talk) 09:17, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, see T251197. Note that you should normally be able to test the Reply tool via a URL parameter in the near future (see T253943). Lofhi (talk) 16:04, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

@Acamicamacaraca this is wonderful to hear! The links @Lofhi shared are all correct (thank you for answering, Lofhi!). We should have an update about the timing of the Reply tool becoming available via a URL parameter (T253943) before next week is over. PPelberg (WMF) (talk) 15:41, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

V2 live observations: Pelagic

phab:T257391

Wow, I was pleasantly surprised to see that Reply 2.0 is live now. One thing that I meant to mention from the mockups but think I neglected was the [ BI ] buttons instead of the [ A ˅ ] dropdown that's in VE and SD. Really happy to see [ A ˅ ] in the release version. :) (I'm not fussed whether bold and italic get their own buttons or appear on a submenu, but I want to be able to access all the other formatting like small, code, etc.) I had a small difficulty on iOS where I selected some text in the top line, and the native context menu obscured the toolbar. There was no way to make it disappear or scroll it out of the way, so I inserted a couple of temporary newlines to move the text down. Short of putting the toolbar below, which is rather drastic, I don't see an easy design fix for that. Pelagic (talk) 11:46, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Just noticed, is the @-dropdown not working in Source mode? Pelagic (talk) 12:01, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

...but I want to be able to access all the other formatting like small, code, etc.)

@Pelagic, can you share a bit more here? Were there tools you were expecting to see that were not present within the A ˅ dropdown of the visual mode's toolbar?

I had a small difficulty on iOS where I selected some text in the top line, and the native context menu obscured the toolbar.

Are you able to share a screenshot here? (I'm assuming you were accessing a talk page on mobile, via the desktop site?)

Just noticed, is the @-dropdown not working in Source mode?

That's correct. Would it be accurate for me to assume you expect all of the tools that are available in the tool's visual mode to be available in the source mode as well?

For context, we intentionally waited on adding any tools to the source mode until we had heard from more experienced contributors (like you!) which tools they would value having access to.

Now that you've said something, we have reason to start this ticket: phab:T257391

Wow, I was pleasantly surprised to see that Reply 2.0 is live now.

We hope you continue to share things you noticed :) PPelberg (WMF) (talk) 00:38, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

• Were there tools you were expecting to see that were not present within the A ˅ dropdown— no, the A drop-down covers the common ones, I was just trying to say I'm glad to have [ A ˅ ] in addition to [ B ][ I ]. After bold and italic, I think small and code would get the most use on talk pages.
• Aside: for the distinction between HTML <b> <i> (as in Wikitext) versus <strong> <em> (as in a some Markdown parsers, and specs like CommonMark) ... sigh. I'd like a button to insert <em></em> instead of tapping num-symb-<-alpha-e-m-num-symb->-alpha etc., but I doubt others would care for it. And that only makes sense in source mode rather than visual anyway. I just saw that em text shows as "italic" in the toolbar here if I cycle from source to visual.
• Are you able to share a screenshot here? I think I took a screenshot. I'll look and dig it up, or else re-create (I'm on laptop rather than iPad at the moment). Am I able to share it here in Structured Discussions? I guess I just upload it to mw-wiki and post a link to the File: page?
• I'm assuming you were accessing a talk page on mobile, via the desktop site?Yes. Apart from all the other reasons to use desktop-web-on-mobile-device, I would switch from mobile to desktop just to use the Reply tool. (You can quote me on that. ;) ) If there's any CSS or JS trick I can use to make it available on mobile/Minerva, please let me know!
• Regarding the @-tool in source mode, I wasn't thinking of the toolbar button but just the ability to type @ as in the original demo. The @-demo predated the visual mode, so I was surprised when that didn't make it to production in this iteration. I'd like a mention button, though, for discoverability (or alternately a "hints" button as discussed elsewhere).
  • I probably said this somewhere already, but when section-editing in source mode, it's easy to copy-paste the username, or the whole userpage-link, from above (if it's not too far above). But in Reply mode, we don't have access to the rest of the page source. Copying the user-page's URL, trimming it, and changing underscores to spaces is a complete pain, as is hand-typing a long username. I would say the username helper is the most important "extra" for Reply. Without it, I might switch to visual, or if I was one of the many who really don't like visual, just not use Reply at all.
• you expect all of the tools that are available in the tool's visual mode to be available in the source mode as well?Not expect; I thought that was off the table from the start. As a frequent tablet user, I'd like to have formatting tools even in source mode, because some of our formatting characters are cumbersome to type on a touch-screen keyboard.
  • For example: to produce ''' on iOS I need to press-hold-release the ,!' key three times; to make < and switch back to alphabetic I need either four taps or tap-drag-tap; [[ is four taps or tap-drag-drag; and so on. Also, touchscreen keyboards generally don't have modifier keys, so Ctrl+B or Ctrl+Shft+6 aren't possible.
  • With a physical keyboard I'm a fiend for key combos that help me avoid taking my hands off to use a pointing device, so I'd use the toolbar a lot less, but I do hit the toolbar menu to look-up keyboard shortcuts. I watch computer users all the time grab the mouse when they could have just used Enter or Tab, etc., so I may be atypical.
• which tools they would valueA good thing about Reply being an alternative to section editing, rather than a replacement, is that it doesn't have to do everything. You want syntax highlighting or tables? Section-edit! Could you run a survey to discover preferences? Pelagic (talk) 14:35, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Umm, does mw-wiki not have an equivalent to w:en:Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard or w:en:Upload file? Oh I found Special:Upload mentioned at Manual:Configuring file uploads, but one needs to be an admin or an uploader. Guess I’ll need to put the screenshot on Commons or in Phab. Pelagic (talk) 23:05, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Okay it’s at phab:F31935493.

EDIT: Contrived examples with selection in top or second line:– phab:F31936043, phab:F31936052, phab:F31936053. Pelagic (talk) 23:21, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Pelagic, is this situation improved (at all) with the rearranged toolbar? (I'm assuming the answer is 'no'.) Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:37, 8 August 2020 (UTC)