Problem: Currently, Wikipedia and it's sister projects offer two different URLs: One for desktop devices, one for mobile devices. Please, remove special subdomain for mobile view. The normal one should be valid for both versions. Old links should redirect to main URL, so old hyperlinks don't direct to nirvana.
Is this about having a truly responsive design (which is indeed a large effort but which is probably under the desktop improvements work, not CommTech) or is this about having one URL rather than two? (The latter is phab:T214998.) --Izno (talk) 22:09, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In my eyes, a resposive design is nice to have. I prefer to have only one URL. Thanks for mentioning the ticket ID. So, I hope it will be realized. --Smarti (talk) 22:31, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Smarti: Can you change your problem statement so it is clear which of the two this proposal is about? Based on this discussion I think it is about the URL ticket, but you should make that clear in the problem statement too. --Izno (talk) 00:17, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think I can get behind this one. I don't see it often, but when I do, it annoys me. I get sent a Wikipedia link, and every so often, it's a mobile link that I don't catch in time. This isn't that substantial of a problem, I must admit, but a simple device detection followed by a redirect isn't that difficult.
I support this! It's really annoying when a mobile user copies a link and sends it to desktop users who then open up an egregiously wrong-looking website. Should just build a response design into one url. —Shrinkydinks (talk) 22:40, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support as a mobile user. This is really annoying regardless of whether you're using a phone or a desktop, since there is no automatic redirection from one version to the other. Even Wikia, an overall terrible site, doesn't have this problem, so why should the Wikimedia ones? Glades12 (talk) 15:07, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is a very risky proposal. TechCom may have insufficient, limited resources to stably and efficiently run both versions under one URL. Furthermore, donations to WMF won't suffice enough to help implement the proposal in just one year(!)... unless the WMF runs massive, huge pledge drives demanding million-dollar goals? Also, this requires tons of code rewriting just for the sake of same-URL convenience, like other major websites do (e.g. Google and other search engines, BBC and other TV networks, etc). I appreciate everyone's need to comfortably type only simultaneous, concurrent URLs. However, we must think the risks first. George Ho (talk) 06:32, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hopefully not, the mobile pages link to the non-mobile ones as the canonical version and I expect most search engines should be looking out for that. Hazard-SJ (talk) 05:22, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose in practice I often switch between mobile and non mobile view. Removing the dot m subdomain would make it harder PAC2 (talk) 09:28, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Even if I edit from a mobile phone, I always need to manually switch to desktop view because the mobile view is practically useless except for mere reading. Wikipedia should encourage corrections of mistakes that readers come across, rather than discourage them with this annoyance. Adam78 (talk) 10:24, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I just don't see why such a trivial detail – that everybody admits is trivial – will be worth the effort. There are so many things to do that will make a real difference for people. This doesn't seem to be one of them. --Joalbertine (talk) 12:25, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Strong oppose. Same URL actually sending different data is really confusing. Especially when you want to send a URL to someone, bookmark to both PC and mobile views, or on PC to test/debug how the data is seen on a mobile. --Wotheina (talk) 09:17, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support It is the standard that is followed by almost all web apps now, to have a single domain across web and mobile Rockin291 (talk) 19:39, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Oppose This is a very risky proposal. TechCom may have insufficient, limited resources to stably and efficiently run both versions under one URL. Furthermore, donations to WMF won't suffice enough to help implement the proposal in just one year(!)... unless the WMF runs massive, huge pledge drives demanding million-dollar goals? Also, this requires tons of code rewriting just for the sake of same-URL convenience, like other major websites do (e.g. Google and other search engines, BBC and other TV networks, etc). I appreciate everyone's need to comfortably type only simultaneous, concurrent URLs. However, we must think the risks first. George Ho (talk) 06:32, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
23:08, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Strong support mobile users would benefit from this. Empire AS (talk) 06:10, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
