Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Simplify the edit window


 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.  No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This is a proposal to simplify the edit window, building on the upcoming changes to the editing interface (scheduled to go live on 1 October).

Basically our edit interface is full of stuff, stuff everywhere, lots of stuff! and is a bit of a mess. While what Oliver Keyes and his team put forward recently is certainly a start, there is no reason why we cannot effect changes directly to improve our edit interface for everyone. We simply need a consensus to do so (and okay from Legal if we decide we want to change the text in at least one of the copyright warnings, but we may not need to do that at all). -— Isarra ༆ 02:33, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Proposed changes
Basically we remove some stuff, reorder some stuff, and profit.
 * Shorten and combine the text of MediaWiki:Wikimedia-copyrightwarning and MediaWiki:Wikimedia-editpage-tos-summary
 * Remove the copyright warning stuff from MediaWiki:Edittools
 * Move MediaWiki:Edittools, or at least the character insertion stuff that's in it, and decide whether we want that on or off by default
 * Move the edit summary explanation from the label to the tooltip
 * Add an editnotice thing in article space



MediaWiki:Wikimedia-copyrightwarning and MediaWiki:Wikimedia-editpage-tos-summary
✅ by Oliver's team - MediaWiki:Wikimedia-copyrightwarning now contains only the specific copyright information, and the disclaimers have been moved into MediaWiki:Editpage-head-copy-warn (an editnotice). The other text has been removed. -— Isarra ༆ 20:11, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Editnotice
Restarting this section to avoid confusion considering the recent changes to MediaWiki:Wikimedia-copyrightwarning, which resulted in an editnotice appearing on every page.

Namespace-specific editnotice
As the wub pointed out, the text is largely irrelevant to other namespaces; while copyright violations will be deleted anywhere, 'encyclopedic content' refers to the encyclopedia, and the most trouble we have with any of this is in the encyclopedia. But that is only part of what the editnotice says (and will probably still say even if we change it), so the question is, do we want it to only show up when editing articles, like the talkpage notice does when editing talkpages?


 * Support - per proposing it, per the wub, and per the fact that having multiple editnotices on a page looks really silly (and pages in project, mediawiki, and talk namespaces tend to already have at least one). -— Isarra ༆ 20:11, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Wording
This may merit updating depending on where all the editnotice is displayed. Currently it is as follows:


 * Content that violates any copyrights will be deleted. Encyclopedic content must be verifiable. Work submitted to Wikipedia can be edited, used and redistributed by other people at will.

A proposal here was to use the following, which would make more sense if only used on articles:


 * Encyclopedic content must be verifiable and written using a neutral point of view. Copyright violations will be deleted. For testing, please edit the sandbox instead.


 * Both seem a little odd for just article space, however, but trying to hammer it into people's heads that this is an encyclopedia can't hurt either way. Any thoughts, preferences, etc? -— Isarra ༆ 20:11, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

✅ along with the other copyright stuff.

MediaWiki:Edittools position
The edittools, as edittools, should also probably be closer to the editbox itself. Ideally we could put a change into the mediawiki core to move the entire interface message up so it's between the editbox and the edit summary field or somewhere around there, but unfortunately using the message for other things (such as the second copyright notice we currently have there) is apparently pretty common and that would mess things up for any projects that have done that. Would this be feasible regardless or are there any other system messages we could use to put the charinsert edittools next to the thing (there's the edit summary label one, but that would just be weird) for people who have the gadget enabled?


 * I say move it to above the edit summary because it just seems to work better there. -— Isarra ༆ 02:22, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Move it to above the edit summary. Just keep it so that it doesn't look attached to the editbox. --Mysterytrey 03:51, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Moving it only works if you have the relatively small JS based one that most users see. The 'flat' all in one huge box that is actually the default JS charinsert tool would push the buttons to the state of 'invisible'. We should really condense all of this to the one most folks see on en.wp —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 09:33, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Leaving the thing where it is in the base page but then using the js to move it might be a good way to resolve that, since yeah, we would only want it up higher if it is the small-looking one. Probably wouldn't hurt to cut down how much is in the base one as well, however. -— Isarra ༆ 19:40, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Support moving above the edit summary, whatever technical method is used to achieve that. the wub "?!"  11:37, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose moving above the edit summary. Or at least let me set some variable from Special:MyPage/common.js to prevent the moving. I like having the box available, but I don't use it often enough that I want it in the way between the edit box and the summary and buttons. Anomie⚔ 00:46, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Leave it where it was, although right now I'd be happy to see it anywhere (it's gone from my edit page, and I found it very useful).  Miniapolis  ( talk ) 19:24, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note - this was already moved above, but there is no reason it cannot be moved back if the consensus falls that way. -— Isarra ༆ 20:11, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * What about moving the Edittools into the WikiEditor, like Wikimedia Commons does it?--Snaevar (talk) 01:39, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

CharInsert edittools gadget defaults - on or off?
Currently the character insertion tools underneath the edit window are a part of the global interface, but there has been work on turning this into a gadget so as to avoid clutter, since it is largely redundant with the character insertion tools in the enhanced editing toolbar at the top of the edit window, and in many cases folks don't need this functionality in general. The question is, do we want the bottom character insertion edittools gadget on by default, especially considering that the toolbar with which it is largely redundant is also on by default?
 * User:Yuvipanda has now gadgetised it :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 12:57, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * This is essentially what I suggested at Gadget/proposals. About the code, why not to use a [//test.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Gadget-EditTools.css more specific CSS selector] instead of ? And why to load all the code even when it is not needed? Isn't better to have a "loader" and a "core" module (e.g. as suggested in the gadget proposal)? Helder 22:02, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The stuff has now been moved into a gadget. It is currently on by default pending the outcome of this discussion-votey-cat-flingy-thingy. -— Isarra ༆ 17:55, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Sweet! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 18:50, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Off by default - personally I figure it might as well be off since it is kind of redundant, but then again it is also a lot easier to use than the one in the edit toolbar, so I dunno, really. But, uh, that's what you all are for. *shifty eyes* -— Isarra ༆ 21:48, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * On by default - the problem with the stuff in the enhanced editing toolbar is that half of the time bits of it don't work. The tools under the window do seem to be more reliable and available than those above.Nigel Ish (talk) 23:58, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * On by default - my biggest issue with the fancy toolbar up top is that it requires using the built in scroll bar (you know, the one that isn't controlled by the mouse wheel because the mouse wheel controls scroll on the page), to do pretty much anything. Sometimes you have to use both scrollbars, and the one on the left for the blue box moves too quickly to be easily controlled. In short, CharInsert is just much, much more user friendly. When dealing with new users, who already have enough trouble finding anything as it is, give them the obvious, simple option.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  03:01, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I assume we're talking about the thing below the save page button that has the drop down menu and the "– — ‘’ “” ° ″ ′ ≈ ≠ ≤ ≥ ± − × ÷ √ ← → · §  Sign your posts on talk pages: ~   Cite your sources: " thing? Just making sure.   S ven M anguard   Wha?  03:05, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, those. -— Isarra ༆ 03:22, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * On a sidenote "you know, the one that isn't controlled by the mouse wheel because the mouse wheel controls scroll on the page" Wut ? which browser is this or which mouse + driver ? Nested behavior like this should be no problem for either and if it is, consider switching because there is simply no excuse for this anymore. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 12:41, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * On by default. I don't trust the wikieditor toolbar up top, and I think others, like me, still like the charinsert bar. --Mysterytrey 03:47, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Off by default and then actually commit to follow up on improving WikiEditor char insert, where required. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 09:34, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * What TheDJ said. --MZMcBride (talk) 14:46, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Off by default. Issues with the WikiEditor should be reported/fixed as needed, and not be the reason to load all this stuff for everyone. Helder 22:02, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Off by default. Redundant and superseded, per others. However, I think the "core" symbols on the "Insert" page of Charinsert (– — ° ≈ ≠ × ÷ ← → ·, to name a few) must be added to the initial page of "special characters" wikieditor. I struggle to find these characters in the current implementation. — This, that, and the other (talk) 07:28, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Totally agreed; we're looking into this :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 14:50, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Off by default. Redundant and confusing. Charinsert is likely used by more advanced editors who can easily switch it on. Having two edit toolbars is a usability no-no. Temporary solution would be to switch charinsert off by default and remove it completely once the required / requested improvements have been made to the Wikieditor toolbar. --Wolbo (talk) 23:16, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Huh??. Looks like the change has already gone into effect today. This is the first I'm aware of this. I don't care to spend a lot of time in these discussions. I'm happy with (yesterday's) edit interface and want that tool bar thingy back that makes it easy to make en dashes and sign posts. How do I get it back???.  Got here because of a link in Signpost, don't know if I'm in the right place. Thanks Wbm1058 (talk) 01:27, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * It's an unrelated change, and we are restoring the toolbar. I'm surprised you hadn't heard about it given that we have had a watchlist notification live for quite a while :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 17:20, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see. I'm not an everyday watchlist user, but I did check my watchlist earlier today and completely overlooked it. If Jimmy asked for money that way, he wouldn't raise much ;) Wbm1058 (talk) 20:57, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Indeed; we need to work out a better way of doing this :). My apologies for any confusion - we've got a fix developed and are just waiting to deploy. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 01:50, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Bug? I'd like to be able to have it on as well as the advanced editing toolbar, but don't mind what is the default so long as there's a way to configure it so. At the moment there seems to be a bug: I've swiched off the advanced bar to get the basic one, but occasionally the "Copy and Paste" version (which I hate) appears instead. Especially (but not reliably) on clicking "Show preview". --Stfg (talk) 14:31, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * This is known; we're fixing it :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 17:20, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks :) I now think On by default, for much the same reasons as others saying this. It's a really useful feature. And while I'm here, thanks for changing it so that the show-preview button doesn't send the edit window back to the start of the section. What it does now makes it much easier to preview and re-edit in discussion like this. --Stfg (talk) 23:03, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
 * What do you mean by "send the edit window back to the start of the section". Are you using the live preview? Isn't this what is requested at 39874? Helder 20:48, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Off by default, although at the moment I have it switched on and it's not in my edit window.  Miniapolis  ( talk ) 19:28, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, another change bugged that; they're working on that. -— Isarra ༆ 20:11, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * On by default: it's really useful and i use used it a lot when editing (before it vanished… even with the gadget enabled ): benzband  ( talk ) 09:36, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
 * On by default as I have it switched on in my preferences and it isn't working. AutomaticStrikeout 21:05, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit summary label
Currently the label for the edit summary is long enough that it pushes the actual inputbox for the edit summary onto a new line because it includes the explanation in it '(Briefly describe the changes you have made)'. I would like to move that explanation out of the label, so it all stays on one line, and into the tooltip for the editsummary inputbox itself such that that says 'Enter a short summary describing the changes you have made' instead of 'Enter a short summary'.


 * Support as proposer or whatever it is people say? -— Isarra ༆ 02:22, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Support both moving it out and having it in the edit summary. --Mysterytrey 03:37, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Support, although it should be noted that the new September version hard-codes the break between the label and the input (partially due to the length of the existing label), but perhaps this can be changed back. Rob Moen is the guy to talk to about it. Kaldari (talk) 07:54, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, that's silly, especially since most projects don't have that long of a thing in the first place. Some don't even have a link to an explanation, the bastards. -— Isarra ༆ 21:23, 20 September 2012 (UTC)


 * ...can we just rename 'edit summaries' to 'summaries of changes'? I know this isn't Simple, but that would just make so more sense in general. -— Isarra ༆ 21:23, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Support. In the4 future, it would be good to change the label to "Summarize your changes". But for now, let's just fix it. — This, that, and the other (talk) 01:30, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Support, currently wasting space. the wub "?!"  11:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Support Small and sensible change.--Wolbo (talk) 23:21, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Support I find the current position of the edit summary text box to be somewhat disorienting. This would be a welcome change.  I, Jethrobot  drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 20:58, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

General discussion

 * Any comments on the overall would go here.


 * I like your sample above. I would support all changes shown and explained above. Rjd0060 (talk) 06:07, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Agree: support all the proposals &mdash; Cup co  21:04, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Please if these changes are made, remember to update relevant help pages and screenshots. the wub "?!"  11:49, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * That's a very good point. Is there any good way to find all of the relevant ones? I'm not really familiar with Wikipedia's help pages. -— Isarra ༆ 21:46, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Here's one of the ones that will need to be changed... File:Mediawiki-button-preview.png. I use it all the time as linkage on new editors' talkpages. Shearonink (talk) 12:56, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Warning
A warning; it looks like some of the changes we're making will in fact hit everyone :S. So, the moved text will be moved for all users (as will tweaks to it) - nothing else should alter unless you're on vector and have the enhanced editing toolbar on. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 12:59, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I follow. Could you please clarify what all your changes are affecting and thus what all would be an overlap and/or moot here? -— Isarra ༆ 04:18, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * You'll note that the mockup shows some mediawiki notices have been moved - that change will hit everyone at once. It's not a direct overlap, nor does it moot the proposals here, I was just trying to keep people who have an interest in de-cluttering in the loop. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 10:07, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Confused?
Glossary/User interface may help.

Button-labels?
I can't figure out where to put this comment, there are so many threads already on this page about the changed edit window, so I hope someone is watching. If this is in the wrong place, feel free to move it (and did this change go 'live' a little early?) I think the "Citations" button on the 'Save page' Show Preview' 'Show changes' line seems to be mislabeled. It should say something along the lines of "Run Citations Tool" or "Run CitationsBot" or 'Fix Citations'. For it to just say the word "Citations" without implying that there is an action attached to clicking on it makes the label incomplete. Also, I know that the Wiki-way is to cap the first word on titles and not cap the rest... How many people, do you think might click on the wrong button in that line of similarly-named & similarly-sized links (especially with the newly-added "Terms of Use" & CC-By-SA sentences)? Would it be possible to bold or even capitalize the pertinent wording especially on the first two buttons so they would perhaps read something like "SAVE page" or "Save page" and "Show PREVIEW" or "Show preview"? I am all the time telling new editors to use the Preview button, but maybe if we could make those first two buttons easier to distinguish visually, the easily-changed Preview would get used first instead of the immutable Save. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 12:56, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * You'll want to talk to Oliver about that, although from what I understand none of the changes in either thing should have affected that. -— Isarra ༆ 20:11, 28 September 2012 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.