Community Wishlist Survey 2021/Editing/Warn when linking to disambiguation pages

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Random proposal ►

◄ Back to Editing  The survey has concluded. Here are the results!


  • Problem: Between 500 and 800 links are added to disambiguation pages each day. This means readers are less likely to get directly to a relevant article when they click on a link and instead are shown a list of possible matches for the term. A recent en RFC to en:Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Make links to disambiguation pages orange by default suggested coming to the community wishlist.
  • Who would benefit: Readers - in helping them get to the relevant article and editors in not having to fix bad links.
  • Proposed solution: A warning message appearng on preview or publish when adding a link to a dab page asking whether the editor really wanted to do this.
  • More comments:
  • Phabricator tickets: T97063
  • Proposer: Rodw (talk) 08:34, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

Sure, but if you know enough to install a userscript like that, you're probably already checking for accidental dabs. A warning to newer users along the lines of "are you sure you wanted to link to this page" seems like a good idea IMO, as long as there were an easy way to resolve it (i.e. pop up options linked from the dab page). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 17:54, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
  • On enwiki, even editors who wanted to link to this page should do so via its X (disambiguation) redirect. A simple warning would be very helpful to readers and to those of us who mend such links. A way to choose a correction and replace [[Mercury]] by [[Mercury (planet)|Mercury]], etc. would be even better. Certes (talk) 13:26, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
    Code to pick the correct link could be shared with a Dablinks replacement. Certes (talk) 17:10, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • For the solution. It can ask if you want to preview the disambiguation page in another browser window or tab. The user could surf from there to a disambiguated page (then could click a button in VE to add this page instead of the disambiguation page)--BoldLuis (talk) 14:39, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • As an easy solution, to activate this option for all your wikis, you can edit m:Special:MyPage/global.css to contain:
.mw-disambig { background-color:#AFEEEE; }
.mw-redirect { background-color:wheat; }

Geert Van Pamel (WMBE) (talk) 13:25, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

  • Thanks for this but I suspect most editors don't do this (or may not even know about it) otherwis we wouldn't be getting 500-800 links to dab pages being created every day.Rodw (talk) 11:55, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
    So this is why we want a global solution, thanks to the below "Support" votes... Geert Van Pamel (WMBE) (talk) 13:38, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Heißt das, der Haken beim Begriffsklärungscheck (d:Q6047536) sollte automatisch gesetzt sein? Denn die Funktionalität ist ja schon lange vorhanden, auch ohne dafür zum Scriptkiddie mutieren zu müssen. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 09:38, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
    This Gadget seems not to be available on all Wikis? Geert Van Pamel (WMBE) (talk) 16:23, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
Of course it's available on all Wikis, it only has to be implemented by the local communities. So there is nothing to do here for the devs, it's an existing gadget. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 16:41, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for clarifying this. Geert Van Pamel (WMBE) (talk) 19:02, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Ruwiki solution:
    ru:MediaWiki:Gadget-disambiguationLinks.css
    ru:MediaWiki:Gadget-disambiguationLinks.js Carn (talk) 20:13, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment Comment I supported this, but only on the assumption that implementation will focus on solving the problem in a modern and user-friendly manner, and not merely implement the disruptive workflow currently hinted at in the comments. I think it'd be a lot simpler and better for everyone if we focus on the act of writing itself. In the visual editor, we can prompt users contextually right as they are creating or inspecting a link, and suggest one of the destinations from the disambiguation page instead, at which point we can have a list of suggestions right there. A similar thing could be done in the 2017 wikitext editor, and even in the 2010 editor when using the dialog to create a link. I don't think this is important enough to distract readers with, nor to inject a primitive warning forcibly into the save workflow. Doing so would, I think, drain considerable amounts of energy and will power from contributors to still continue with their edit, and much more to actually rediscover and address the issue itself. That sounds more like abuse mitigation, and less like contributor education. --Krinkle (talk) 03:28, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Voting

  • Support Support ValeJappo【〒】 18:29, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Could be a convenient way to know whether a page is a direct link to an article or not. I will add that we should do that with redirects too if possible. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 18:29, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Eridian314 (talk) 18:30, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Dr747 (talk) 19:14, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support DragonHawk (talk) 19:27, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Quarz (talk) 20:08, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support MichaelMaggs (talk) 20:21, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:40, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Berdajeno (talk) 20:41, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Stryn (talk) 20:53, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support A subject expert who adds a link is better placed to pick its correct target than a polymath gnome. Certes (talk) 20:53, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:57, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Silver hr (talk) 21:09, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support KTC (talk) 21:11, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Kisnaak (talk) 21:21, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Pmau (talk) 21:23, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Nw520 (talk) 22:46, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support YFdyh000 (talk) 23:34, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Redactedentity (talk) 23:47, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support 5225C (talkcontributions) 00:10, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support RXerself (talk) 00:34, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 01:05, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Alkari (talk) 01:39, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support * Pppery * it has begun 02:01, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Keepcalmandchill (talk) 02:37, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Shizhao (talk) 02:55, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support // Lollipoplollipoplollipop :: talk 03:18, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Ezlev (talk) 03:46, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Flipchip73 (talk) 04:32, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support —— Eric Liu留言百科用戶頁 04:34, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support This would hopefully eliminate a tedious maintenance task, freeing up editor resources. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 05:52, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Xgeorg (talk) 06:54, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support P40fA (talk) 07:03, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Mbkv717 (talk) 07:11, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Ardub23 (talk) 07:53, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support No such user (talk) 08:44, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Nurg (talk) 09:12, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support SunDawn (talk) 10:37, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Lion-hearted85 (talk) 10:55, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support JAn Dudík (talk) 11:01, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Kpjas (talk) 11:08, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Sakretsu (炸裂) 11:36, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support 1Mmarek (talk) 11:49, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Lugnuts (talk) 12:30, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support MilkyDefer (talk) 12:46, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Would help to optimize usability both for readers and editors. Jjkorff (talk) 13:31, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Hb2007 (talk) 14:12, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support and ability to open it and choose the correct link would be even better Kaybeesquared (talk) 14:14, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Mannivu · 15:02, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support NMaia (talk) 15:23, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Em-mustapha User | talk 15:50, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Lirazelf (talk) 16:54, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 17:38, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose Oppose Honestly, with so much concern over people mixing things up, there's not enough disambiguation in Wikimedia, and this would just be a deterrent. Tyrekecorrea (talk) 19:35, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Paul1764 (talk) 20:46, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Browk2512 (talk) 21:17, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Nehaoua (talk) 22:39, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support dwf² (talk) 22:54, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support - Darwin Ahoy! 01:52, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Nyq (talk) 02:14, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support JPxG (talk) 05:52, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support - yona B. (D) 07:34, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Szczot3k (talk) 08:03, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support extremely needed feature. —Omnilaika02 (talk) 11:29, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Mike Peel (talk) 13:28, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support disambiguation links are almost never intentional, except in hatnote templates Dexxor (talk) 16:17, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Afernand74 (talk) 20:15, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Srđan (talk) 22:05, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support  Swazmo DiscBlanco.svg DiscWikiP.svg 22:56, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Geniac (talk) 07:21, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Adamoszkovics (talk) 10:20, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Paucabot (talk) 12:17, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Strong support. Must be prioritary. BoldLuis (talk) 14:35, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support ArnabSaha (talk) 15:11, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Asartea Talk (Enwiki Talk (preferred)) 16:08, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Bencemac (talk) 16:11, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support StringRay (talk) 16:23, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Noel baran (talk) 16:52, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Szalax (talk) 16:52, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support James Martindale (talk) 16:56, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support warning in preview but no warning modal, in which we risk losing the edit altogether czar 17:10, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support --Gereon K. (talk) 17:40, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support KasciJ (talk) 18:17, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Anaxial (talk) 18:52, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support --Andyrom75 (talk) 19:19, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support This would be useful outside of the Wikimedia world as well. -Xbony2 (talk) 19:21, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support --Kusurija (talk) 19:25, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Wutsje (talk) 20:02, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support. Meiræ 21:45, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Prioritizing improvements that increase human productivity is strategic, and preventing problems in the first place is helpful. -- Beland (talk) 08:18, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Jingkaimori (talk) 08:54, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Helder 09:56, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Francois-Pier (talk) 10:45, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support ~Cybularny Speak? 11:20, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Tom Ja (talk) 12:38, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 14:36, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support TheLatentOne (talk) 19:55, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Theshumai (talk) 22:19, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Vincent Simar (talk) 22:42, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Emperork 🐋🐰 00:16, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 02:38, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support TeKaBe (talk) 07:52, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Edgars2007 (talk) 10:26, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Gufosowa (talk) 10:50, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Kaviraf (talk) 20:06, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Podzemnik (talk) 21:14, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Kimsey0 (talk) 22:21, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support β16 - (talk) 16:16, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Papuass (talk) 21:42, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support and agree with Kaybeesquared: ability to open the disambiguation link and choose the correct link would be even better. RavBol (talk) 22:08, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support WTM (talk) 00:30, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose Oppose As noted above, this is already provided several times over by user-level JS and CSS. The MW devs have no reason to waste resources reinventing this wheel.  — SMcCandlish ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ʌ<  05:33, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose Oppose per SMcCandlish's summary. I think there needs to be a really strong reason for new editors to be presented with a message and their edit unexpectedly not being saved, as it's a steeper learning curve, more time involved to make a simple change, and the person may not understand that their edit has not gone through and exit the page. 500 to 800 per day doesn't seem unreasonable, particularly given that many can be ignored given that they are from Articles for Creation drafts that will be insta-declined or edits not in article space etc. Experienced editors should be reminded of the options they have to be able to catch themselves before (or after) introducing dab links. — Bilorv (talk) 14:18, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Definitely would come in handy for me Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 15:13, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Mollifiednow (talk) 18:08, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support SeGiba (talk) 18:17, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Vacant0 (talk) 18:38, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Vincent Ramos (talk) 19:27, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose Oppose per other opposers. This functionality does not need to be globalized, and there's no indication that this particular mistake needs to be warned against compared to any other mistake that could be made when editing a page. There are already methods to find disambiguation links in the bodies of mainspace articles, (i.e. the DAB orange link gadget,) so the errors are easily fixable, especially if you notify the user who introduced the DAB link by undoing their edit so that they know to be mindful in the future. I don't believe we automatically warn users for any other type of mistake that could be made, so I fail to see why this particular issue is worth the change. And if this does get implemented, I would hope this only applies in the mainspace or can be turned off in some way, because I would hate to be warned if I'm linking to a DAB page on a talk page or something along those lines. And even then, there are definitely reasons to link to DAB pages in mainspace articles anyway. I think the biggest problem with this proposal is that it would ignore context, which I think it does, at the proposal apparently just throws a warning if a DAB page is ever linked to. What if I want to link to that DAB page via a See Also section, or god forbid I use an about template. I could very well be misinterpreting the proposal, but I would rather continue edit with as few automatic warnings as possible, and there are good reasons to link to disambiguation pages as well that unfortunately appear as if they will be included in the warnings. Utopes (talk) 19:48, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support GiFontenelle (talk) 21:01, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Does anyone think a similar fuction when editing would be benficial for editors? DMT biscuit (talk) 21:44, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose Oppose Per SMcCandlish's rationale. This calls for the pertinent CSS/JS scripts to be ported to the projects who want them, it doesn't call for the WMF to reinvent the wheel. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:56, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Wolfmartyn (talk) 14:21, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support no brainer, and skips the talk page message the next day from DPL bot Enwebb (talk) 16:28, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Dankowski (talk) 20:31, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose Oppose as others have noted, this may discourage (and be confusing to) new editors and it is a generally easy problem to fix already. --Ita140188 (talk) 02:18, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Risk Engineer (talk) 15:43, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · 02:04, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support ingenious idea! JN Dela Cruz (talk) 16:45, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Mmitchell10 (talk) 20:02, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Nadzik (talk) 11:57, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose Oppose Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 15:46, 19 December 2020 (UTC) Gibt's schon, da muss nichts neu entwickelt werden. Ist ein Helferlein (Gadget), das nur angekreuzt werden muss.
  • Oppose Oppose A link to a dab page is among the least significant errors that can occur in a newly contributed text and I see absolutely no reason to start harassing editors about it even more than we already do (on enwiki, they'd get a talk page message from DPLbot about the dablink any way). Also, this was proposed, and rejected, on enwiki back in 2016. Uanfala (talk) 17:32, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Any change should exclude deliberate disambiguation links, the ones with "(disambiguation)" on the end; warning for this would just be annoying. Any warning should also mention this option. Would support visually distinguishing disambiguation links from links to pages. Since I enabled showing them in orange I've added far fewer unintentional DAB links; I catch it in preview. It's also useful as a reader, just as redlinks are. We might need to think about exactly how to distinguish, but readers would soon learn a new convention. HLHJ (talk) 18:29, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Fringilla (talk) 19:49, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose Oppose, we already have a gadget that can highlight disambiguation links. T. Le Berre, the french serpent à plumesTry and talk to me buddy 01:08, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support, I'm supporting this on the assumption that implementation will focus on solving the problem in a modern and user-friendly manner, and not merely implement the disruptive workflow currently hinted at in the comments. --Krinkle (talk) 03:26, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support :JarrahTree (talk) 08:58, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Supporttyseria 10:10, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Rzuwig 11:20, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support David1010 (talk) 13:07, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Wikipedia is about the reader, and it needs to be easy to read and coherent in order to get the information across to the reader. I believe that wikilinks are the backbone of wikipedia, and when clicked, it should bring you to the article you expect, not a disambiguation page. This policy would provide an easy way for editors to recognize disambiguation page links, and alter them to send the reader to the proper page. JazzClam (talk) 14:05, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose Oppose I was a strong support until I saw 1) this is do-able on a per-user JS basis and, 2) saw that this could introduce friction for novice editors. EEMIV (talk) 14:40, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support Mykola7 (talk) 14:52, 21 December 2020 (UTC)