Talk:Community Tech/Section Name in Diff

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

Hello, everyone! We would love your feedback on the analysis posted on the project page.

Have we covered the primary ways that editors can currently see the section name in the diff?[edit]

Have we covered the primary reasons why section names are excluded from diffs?[edit]

  • As far as I can see, yes. · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 15:28, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Define reasons ;) It's said, when and how currently section names are included, and how the syntax works more or less, but that's just the matter of the fact, not the motive. The reason in terms of motive is probably, that in the early days lines were enough, as articles were shorter, and nobody cared much later on. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 15:36, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Have we covered the primary reasons why editors want the section name in the diff?[edit]

  • As far as I can see, yes.· · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 15:29, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
  • I think so more or less. Lines are nor t suitable as locations for longer articles and those with a more sophisticated layout. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 15:37, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

What are the most common reasons you, personally, want the section name in the diff?[edit]

  • If in some bigger articles changes are made, it's hard to find them in the proper text, the lines given as location have no real connection to the text itself, they are very abstract, and depending on the use of infoboxes, empty lines, references, pictures and tables (and how they are used in the source code), it can be anywhere in the article layout. With the use of section names in the diffs those parts in the article can be found and compared better and faster, and especially with flagged versions I see what I "sichte". Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 15:29, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Exactly what Sänger explains above. The line numbers have always been a great frustration to me, as obviously they would be useful for locating text, but I have never found a way of getting them to display anywhere except in the diff, where they are not in any way useful. This is particularly problematic in long talk pages, where the only practical way of finding the text is to run a text search, and hope your search string is selective enough to not get too many hits. There might be other ways to find the place on the page, but section headers are a good start, as they are usually {but not always) unambiguous. Line numbers would possibly be even better if they could be made to display in read mode and edit mode, but I have no idea about whether this could be done. · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 15:43, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
    And line numbers are different depending on the use of table syntax for example. Whether you use one line per cell (very neat and fine to change things in tables) or one line per line (makes it more compact in the source code) makes the numbers for the text lines in the diffs completely different. they are only usable for articles with less then a dozen lines. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 16:01, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Especially the VE creates a lot of collateral damage with introducing some syntax changes anywhere in the article, some unwanted. For example it puts "Datei:" in galleries, where it's just useless clutter, sometimes & nbsp; is randomly put in somewhere and so forth. It's fine to be able to look up those random changes to selectively revert them, as usually some are useful, most are not. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 07:15, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

How and in what format would you prefer to see the section name included in the diff?[edit]

  • The section name should be best used instead of, or as an addition to the line. They should at least appear in the diff above the changed section, if it's a long section, and the diff is towards the end, the leading lines could be excluded, but then line numbers should be included for both the section header and the diff. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 15:41, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
  • That looks reasonable if I understand it correctly. If there is a way to use the line numbers, keep them, but section header for the changed text is fine. It should be above the changed text on both sides, but I dont think it matters if there is any other unchanged text from the section other than directly before and after the change. A go to this change button would be useful if reasonably practicable. · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 15:50, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
  • If it's not too much work, it might make sense to "uniquify" the section names. On an RfC with multiple things being discussed, you can have multiple "Support" and "Oppose" sections. What I'd suggest would be to take section names that aren't unique, and prepend the next higher-up section in the hierarchy to it. So if someone votes to support 3 points in an Rfc, it would be "Point 1 / Support", "Point 2 / Support", and "Point 3 / Support", rather than just "Support", "Support", "Support". Other than that, this is a great improvement. Bully! TomDotGov (talk) 19:32, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Any other feedback on the project?[edit]

@Pbsouthwood: Hello, and apologies for the delay in response. Our team was involved in early stages of research and design, but we have just shared an update on potential ways to approach the project. We encourage you to check it out and share your feedback. As for the timeline, we don't have a specific timeline yet, as we're balancing multiple projects. However, we will share status updates as they come along the project page. Thank you! --IFried (WMF) (talk) 00:31, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

follow up[edit]

I got a message in my talk page.

In my opinion, in diff field; the below Wikitext for older version there should be Preview of older version. Similrly below Wikitext for newer version there should be Preview of Newer version.

What I am saying is like

Old Version, Wikitext.
Such as <code>initial</code>
New Version, Wikitext
Such as <code>final</code>.
Old Version, executed.
Such as initial
New Version, executed
Such as final

Regards

RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 08:47, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Feedback on early ideas[edit]

Pinging everyone who has previously commented on the page. @Pbsouthwood, Sänger, TomDotGov, and RIT RAJARSHI:

Thank you I will check it back 5 to 10 hours later RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 06:51, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, everyone! We have begun the early planning stages of this project, and we would love your feedback! Please check out our April 8th status update on the project's content page for details. As you go through the examples provided, please be aware that they are simply ideas to meant prompt early discussions. We’ll need to do more research and planning before we can commit to any designs. Your feedback will help us determine next steps. Below, we have provided some questions. Thank you in advance! --IFried (WMF) (talk) 00:25, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

What do you think of the display of the section name in idea 1?[edit]

  • Improvement on current display. Clicking on section name to go to section is useful. Direct link to edit is useful. · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 04:53, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

What do you think of the display of the section name in idea 2?[edit]

  • Improvement on current display. Section name in wikitext may be occasionally useful, and since everythig else is in wikitext it seems more consistent. Does the line number serve any purpose? I have never found a way to use it. · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 04:55, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

What do you think of the display of the section name in idea 3?[edit]

  • Improvement on current display. Displaying the section name in wikitext may be of some benefit, and bracketing the changes with the section name may be occasionally useful specially for very large sections and long talk discussions, when viewing several changes at the same time. Direct section edit link is useful · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 05:00, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

What do you think of the display of the section name in the visual diff (idea 4)?[edit]

  • I never use VE, so don't know enough to say whether this is an improvement. · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 05:12, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

What are the most common methods (e.g. via RecentChanges, History, before publishing changes, etc) that you use to access diff pages?[edit]

  • Mostly from watchlist, fairly often from history, fairly often from view changes. fairly often from diffs linked from discussions etc. Not necessarily in that order. Hardly ever from anywhere else I can think of. · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 05:18, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

What are the most common reasons that you access diff pages?[edit]

  • To view changes in watchlist alerts. To review what I have changed in an edit, to refer to something linked in a post, when trying to analyse what happened in the history of an article, and who wrote what. (not necessarily in that order) · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 05:22, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

What kind of information (e.g. mistakes, vandalism, context, etc) are you looking for in the diff?[edit]

  • All of the above depending on where I link from. Sometimes inspiration for expanding an article. Sometimes editor behavioural hints/evidence. · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 05:29, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

What actions (e.g. revert, thank, make further changes, etc) do you usually take after looking at a diff?[edit]

  • All of the above, but mostly nothing, as there is usually nothing that needs to be done. · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 05:25, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Anything else you would like to add?[edit]

Show 2 preview panes Side by side[edit]

What I am tryng to tell is like somewhat


Old Version, Wikitext.
Such as <code>initial</code>
New Version, Wikitext
Such as <code>final</code>.
Old Version, executed.
Such as initial (preview)
New Version, executed
Such as final (preview)

RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 05:41, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Strong approval of these proposals:[edit]

Bold font for SND[edit]

Example of section name (“Medieval Era” and “Feudal Era”) displayed in the diff


Coloured Visual Difference[edit]

Idea #4: Visual Diff

Plus I add a request for 2 preview panes side by side[edit]

one for previous version, one for new version, with diff highlighted.

Proposal for showing both preview in diff

RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 05:53, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

My username is showing because I used my sandbox. I used it just as example and not for any kind of self promotion. If you have better example you may use that too.

RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 06:35, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

This proposal is about showing the section header in the diffs, no other stuff about diffs. If you have a section with more then 4 paragraphs, and change anything in it somewhere in the middle, the next guy or gal has no clue where this was happening, besides the useless line-numbers, that are shown nowhere in the normal surroundings. Your examples seem to have something else in mind, but that's not what this here is about.
Now the changes paragraph and the ones direct before and after are shown in the diffs, marked with futile line numbers, that have next to no information for editors at all. The change wants to have the headers of the changed paragraphs incluuded in the diffs, so that you know, where in the article the change(s) have happened. | Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 10:29, 11 April 2020 (UTC)