Community Wishlist Survey 2015/Notifications/sw
This page is translatable, but you can only vote on the English version.
Voting instructions:
- Voting begins on Monday, November 30th and will end on Monday, December 14th.
- Any user with at least 100 edits on any project is eligible to vote. See participation requirements for more details.
- Positive votes marked with Support and signature will be counted as the proposal's tally. There's no limit to the number of proposals for which you may cast support votes.
- Comments marked Neutral or Oppose are acceptable, in order to ask clarifying questions or raise potential problems for discussion, but they will not be counted as negative votes.
- Please do not add new proposals to this page; the proposals phase ended on November 22nd.
Echo notifications: mark to read
Sometimes happens that I haven't enough time to reply/process all the alerts I've received. But if I open the notification the alert disappear and over time I could forget the ones left behind. So I propose to add the possibility to mark a notification as not read, in order to left the echo alert lited up. --AlessioMela (talk) 15:31, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Earlier discussion and endorsements |
---|
|
Kura
- Support I tend to leave notifications until I have time to take action on them, it would be nice to know what they are and then leave it for later. Samwalton9 (talk) 10:36, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Support, same--Martinligabue (talk) 15:02, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Helder 23:31, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 00:15, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support RoodyAlien (talk) 03:00, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Risker (talk) 04:27, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Kvardek du (talk) 09:35, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support--Manlleus (talk) 15:35, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Rzuwig► 09:36, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support — Arkanosis ✉ 14:19, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support --SuperJew (talk) 14:56, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support SantiLak (talk) 10:46, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support --Yeza (talk) 16:53, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
Chakachua "Asante" sasa tunaweza kuwashuru wahariri wasioleweka
I often want to thank an anonymous editor for a great edit. This should be possible. (Yes, I know that IP addresses are generally not static.) Thanks, --Gnom (talk) 10:16, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Earlier discussion and endorsements |
---|
|
Kura
- Support בנימין (talk) 07:37, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Support Goldzahn (talk) 12:41, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Support I mean, we block IPs, so let's thank them as well. Even if it was another user on the same IP, no difference. Debresser (talk) 13:05, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Support IJBall (talk) 13:55, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Support Alternatively, it may done by an automated pasting of a template to the IP talk page. --Leyo (talk) 23:10, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Support Much needed. A talk page template would work too, but preferably the whole action should be one click (plus a confirming click). Gap9551 (talk) 01:23, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support--Kippelboy (talk) 05:37, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support --Martinligabue (talk) 15:04, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support --Tdslk (talk) 19:09, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support In addition, I think users Leyo and Debresser both have valid points. -- 2ReinreB2 (talk) 21:26, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose Encouraging anonymous editors will limit meaningful communication between editors and increase admin workload for problems presently resolved through user talk pages. Thewellman (talk) 23:05, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Helder 23:31, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Tar Lócesilion (queta) 00:09, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Comment Who are we thanking, and will the person we are thanking know we're thanking them in many cases, especially if we thank a particular period of time after the edit? This might make sense if the thanking is limited to very recent edits. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 00:18, 2 December 2015 (UTC) Support After additional consideration, as long as a time limit is applied, I can support this. Generally, we don't leave a warning about an edit more than 24 hours after it occurred (although nothing stops us from doing so, admittedly), so a Thank after 24 hours is probably useless. Think of this in terms of using up processor time and database inserts/queries -- do we want to encourage actions that likely will not be seen? Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 18:56, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Useful for recent edits. Regards, Kertraon (talk) 00:22, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Chaoborus (talk) 02:33, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Litlok (talk) 08:34, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Kvardek du (talk) 09:36, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support. It can attract anonymous editors even more. --Renessaince (talk) 14:28, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support--Manlleus (talk) 15:35, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support --Usien6 (talk) 15:48, 2 December 2015 (UTC) // Pretty easy to implement and, as Renessaince commented, it can attract anonymous editors even more.
- Comment If it is considered a problem that a thank-you may never reach the contributor, this is equally true for IP warning messages. If anything, there's nothing lost if a thank-you reaches the wrong person, or no-one at all. A vandalism warning reaching the wrong person is worse for sure, and we accept that possibility. Gap9551 (talk) 16:36, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Yes, if we can warn them we should be able to thank them too. PamD (talk) 21:48, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Mike Peel (talk) 23:20, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support SteveStrummer (talk) 02:30, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support YBG (talk) 06:33, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Rzuwig► 09:36, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support — Arkanosis ✉ 14:19, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support — Fylbecatulous talk 17:07, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Theredmonkey (talk) 18:58, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support SantiLak (talk) 10:46, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Have wanted to do this several times. Even if they never see it, it would be good to have stats on how valuable the contributions of anons are. I think that many are hesitant newbies with the specialist knowledge that wikipedia needs, the ones that we too often drive away. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 21:56, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Halibutt (talk) 00:37, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support --Urbanecm (talk) 12:37, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support would be useful especially to thank anon users who revert vandalism (if they already have a welcome message) KylieTastic (talk) 16:12, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
Opt out of Thanks feature
Some people (for example me) would like to opt out of the Thanks feature. Disabling and enabling this feature should be logged in the Thanks log. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 14:06, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Earlier discussion and endorsements |
---|
Of course there is a grey area in the middle. When I read stuff like this or that or that then I will usually remove it but sometimes I ignore it. Facilitating laziness has downsides. For example, it is much easier for me to tag an article than it is to remove the POV and try to find neutral sources to create a more balanced article. I understand that tagging has its benefits, but I am a lazy person so I end up tagging certain problems instead of actually fixing that problem. If I didn't have the option to tag problems then I would've fixed many of those problems. Before the Thanks-feature the people who wished to extend their gratitude to someone who did something useful would write a personal handwritten thank you note on their talk page. One of the reasons why they did that is because there was no other way; this was the laziest method available. The WikiLove extension is a good idea, it makes it easier for people to leave adorable kittens or lovely snacks on other peoples talkpages, and most users of this extension still write a short message explaining why they think that that person deserves it. Those short thank-you notes have multiple benefits, they make people happy, people are proud of a talkpage full of thank you messages (don't underestimate the importance of this, they see them frequently and they know others see these messages too), and often people end up having a pleasant conversation with the person who wrote the thank you message which may result in a collaboration. These messages are the only thing they get in return for their volunteerwork. They encourage people to keep up the good work. The Thanks feature makes it a lot easier to thank people (which reduces the value, this is called inflation). But instead of a personal handwritten message you get an impersonal +1 (or Facebook Like). It is hidden away in some sort of log (how impersonal can you get?) and other people are unable to see it (no more bragging rights). No one looks at the Thanks log, not even their own. Looking at my own Thanks log makes me sad. If you are a gnome fixing typos then you can fix thousands of typos without any human contact whatsoever. All you get is a logbook like this. If the Thanks feature didn't exist then at least a handful of the people who have used it to thank me would've written a real, personal, message which would actually have value, both to the writer and the recipient. Of course you still get messages telling you you did something wrong... People are worried about editor retention and the lack of female contributors but they don't seem to realize it that stuff like the Thanks feature is a part of that problem, not the solution.
Just undeploy this extension and be done with it. MER-C (talk) 15:47, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
|
Kura
- Support Lugnuts (talk) 12:09, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Support Logical option. Debresser (talk) 13:04, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Comment Does this mean that in the edit history of a page the "Thank" button/link would not appear next to particular user names? Or that it would complete the action and the 'thanked' editor would never see the Thank? Ckoerner (talk) 17:18, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support though, it would seem simpler to just have an option to opt out of notifications (sort of along the lines of user Ckoerner's comment). -- 2ReinreB2 (talk) 21:31, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose There is already a preference for not being notified about a Thanks. Totally opting out doesn't change anything significant for the opt-outer, and may even be harmful to the wiki, as editors wishing to thank someone who has opted out won't have the opportunity to get the good feeling of thanking. This is not a commentary on whether we should have had a Thanks feature in the first place, but rather that the development of this proposal serves no essential purpose. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 00:30, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support--Manlleus (talk) 15:35, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose- unless there is an opt of out templates on user talk, by the same reasoning. Slowking4 (talk) 02:57, 3 December 2015 (UTC).
- Oppose When somebody don't want this feature, it is possible to disable notifications in prefereces. And this difference can be confusing I think. --Urbanecm (talk) 12:39, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose You can disable notifications. I would say I've only ever thanked and been thanked for things where 'thanks' says all that needs to be said. I don't think removing the option for someone to thank you will encourage them to post a 'real' thanks message to you. I would not want a talk page message for every fix I do that someone wants to say thanks for. KylieTastic (talk) 16:09, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
Reminders in notifications
See this one. --Edgars2007 (talk) 07:20, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
- From the Phab description: "As a user, I'd like to be able to remind myself of a task, after a configurable period of time." Ryan Kaldari (WMF) (talk) 17:07, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Earlier discussion and endorsements |
---|
|
Votes
- Support 4nn1l2 (talk) 03:20, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Support Goldzahn (talk) 12:42, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Support. --Stryn (talk) 19:11, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Support --MGChecker (talk) 19:24, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Support — Bilorv (talk) 20:22, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Support .--Grind24 (talk) 20:47, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Support. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 21:18, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Support Nyttend (talk) 21:51, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Support Gap9551 (talk) 01:21, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support --YodinT 02:49, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support --Martinligabue (talk) 15:04, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support tufor (talk) 15:49, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Papuass (talk) 17:30, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support This seems really useful, and I would personally appreciate it -- though external calendars with reminder features do achieve the same effect. -- 2ReinreB2 (talk) 21:35, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Helder 23:31, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Yes. Regards, Kertraon (talk) 00:28, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Comment I'm trying to figure out how this would serve a wiki. Can't people just set alarms on their computing devices? Why duplicate that in the wiki? Also, someone would have to visit the wiki to get the alarm, so its timing would oftentimes be worthless. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 00:39, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Risker (talk) 04:28, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Litlok (talk) 08:35, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support--Manlleus (talk) 15:35, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Rzuwig► 09:37, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support --AS (talk) 09:56, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support -- SantiLak (talk) 10:46, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support --The Polish (talk) 17:35, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 11:17, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
- Support --Urbanecm (talk) 12:40, 5 December 2015 (UTC)