Wikipedia talk:Talk pages consultation 2019/Phase 2

Notifications
In this section I'll be notifying all of the registered users who participated in the local phase 1 discussion. Further information about phase 2 can be found at Talk pages consultation 2019/Phase 2 and mw:Talk pages consultation 2019/Phase 1 report. Jc86035 (talk) 14:58, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Notifications, part 1. Jc86035 (talk) 15:03, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Notifications, part 2. Jc86035 (talk) 15:04, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
 * My "participation" being no more than, which incidentally I've too. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 16:55, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
 * note: you have now been opted-in to phase three :D — xaosflux  Talk 17:14, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

I am not the only person to come P
Here I am at this Kashmirthomas (talk) 01:41, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

I’m confused YippeeSlushy (talk) 11:12, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Is there anything in particular that you're confused about? Jc86035 (talk) 15:23, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Really, indentations aren't that hard
It was surprising to me that, for all the people who complain about how "hard" it is to properly align indents, I wound up fixing several indented posts that were responses to posts I had made. It's not that hard: if the first indent is a colon, keep using colons. If the first indent is an asterisk, keep using asterisks. Don't mix colons and asterisks in the same indent because it causes accessibility problems. The problems come in when people keep using their preferred method of indenting instead of using the same method that has already been started. I encourage people to just take a few minutes and review their own indenting practices, particularly when involved in a discussion that includes significant commentary about indenting/bullet point/numeric list practices. Sadly, when I look at the talk page tutorial, it specifically suggests the mixing of colons and bullet points/number signs in certain circumstances, which we know is an accessibility issue. Risker (talk) 14:43, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * sometimes people want "bullets", sometimes they don't - the "accessibility issue" should really be addressed in software as the majority of people using talk pages are not trying to specially make "description lists" or "unordered lists", and if we easily supported "tabs" they would likely just use them. — xaosflux  Talk 14:48, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * It's not a question of "hard", it's a question of "superfluous". Typing in a typewriter isn't hard either, but I still prefer a word processor. François Robere (talk) 15:08, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * That's not a bad idea. Perhaps it should be in our guidelines.  I have enough trouble reading text when someone replies to a "*" with a "::"; I didn't see specific problems with following "*" with "*:" and "*::", but if it is an accessibility issue, we should fix it.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 18:31, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * The accessibility issue isn't from doing "*" then "*:" then "*::", it's when someone changes the prefix (e.g. doing "::::" or "**::" next) or leaves a blank line. More details are already in the guideline WP:LISTGAP. If you want to visualize the accessibility problem, User:Anomie/listgap.css will add a dotted red line where it occurs. Anomie⚔ 00:04, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Or when someone replies to " " with " " and then " ". Getting it backwards is unfortunately not that unusual.  Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 16:25, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

I don't really get why people get so aggressive due to the way they use their energy and frequency Michael jadens (talk) 08:04, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Phase 2 is over: time to wrap-up!
Hello

First of all, thank you for hosting that conversation on your wiki. We really value the work you've done!

The consultation is now over. We have received a lot of feedback, that require a lot of work and time to be summarize. We have decided to postpone communities summaries' due date to Monday June 24.

A page has been created to host communities summaries. Please add yours there.

If you have any question, please contact me.

On behalf of the Talk pages consultation team, Trizek (WMF) (talk) 08:58, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Apologies for being unable to post a full summary; I chose not to because it would be a fairly difficult task and my heavy participation would hinder any attempt to construct a neutral point of view. I have instead posted a statistical analysis of the responses to the first section, which I hope will be helpful. I would be fine with summarizing the other sections of the discussion if that's desired. Jc86035 (talk) 15:57, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Most of the participants are... rather busy at the moment. — python coder (talk &#124; contribs) 15:25, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Are they? I've mostly been ignoring that outside of keeping up through the Discord server, since it would probably continually drain my energy if I tried to actively participate. Jc86035 (talk) 15:37, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your message, Jc86035, and also thank you very much for your help. Statistics are definitely something that helps!
 * We read every comment and make our own cross-wiki synthesis. Getting that synthesis from your community is a good way for us to catch the wiki-mood itself. No worries if you can't provide one though.
 * Trizek (WMF) (talk) 14:14, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Try out the Reply tool
One of the main outcomes from this consultation is the "Reply tool". I've been expanding Talk pages project with information about it. Please feel free to try out the Reply tool on the Beta Cluster. It's pretty bare-bones right now, but I'm liking it so far. Please ping me if you have feedback on it. Thanks, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:58, 19 March 2020 (UTC)