Help talk:Notifications/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Incorrect reverted message

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T50111

This is incredibly minor but I thought you ought to know. If someone moves a page and someone reverts a change prior to your edit, it notifies you that you have been reverted. example. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 20:54, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I filed a bug.--ragesoss (talk) 18:22, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Would someone please add an edit notice to this page?

Big and bright, along the lines of: "Presently, IP editors still receive the orange bar notifying them of a new message on their talk page, and new accounts that have given us a confirmed email address receive an email notifying them of new messages on their talk page." --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 05:33, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Cannot reset number by going to page

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T49912

So I have had some talk page notices today, and I see that if I go to my talk page directly instead of going via clicking the little red number, the number stays red. This will train the user to ignore the little red number (I've already started, and I'm one of the people who *likes* this feature).If I have a notification for my talk page and another for a mention somewhere else, that number should go down by one when I go to my talk page and by 2 if I then go to the page where I was mentioned, *regardless* of whether or not I've done so through the notification interface. Clicking on the number is useless until it has a diff rather than just a link to my talk page (something I already have!), and even the section link is useless for pages with big sections. So....two points here:

• All links (including those onwiki and those in emails) must include a diff to the edit
• The little red number should automatically decrease when a user goes to the page for which s/he has received a notification, whether or not they go through the notification interface.

I'm enthusiastic about the new features with this tool, but I'm quite disappointed that the features that made the old tool useful (direct links to the edit, emails that include links, high visibility, notice disappearing simply by going to the page involved) have all been deprecated. I have faith that the team can get this right, and I know it's a weekend so hopefully they're refreshing themselves for a busy week. Please let's get this right; I think a lot of the criticism about visibility is very valid and is really diminishing the ability to recognize the positives here. Risker (talk) 19:30, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I came here to say pretty much the same thing. Thanks Risker for such an articulate explanation. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:24, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

• I just now noticed that if I go to my talk page itself, the notification stays, but if I go to the talk page history or last diff (via Writ Keeper's script) the notification goes away. Ignatzmice•talk 02:08, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
  • By the way: keep in mind that my script does this manually; each time you visit your talk page, I check the unread notifications for unread messages and mark any talk-page ones read, while leaving the others unread (this happens after the page load, though, so usually the notification number won't reflect it until the page is re-loaded). This is done manually, though; it's not a feature of Echo proper. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:52, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
• Hi Risker, HJ Mitchell and Ignatz: Thanks for reporting this issue, which is already on our to-do list. I just filed this new bug for it and gave it our highest priority: T49912. We aim to deploy it at the same time as the new message indicator, if possible. Sorry for this inconvenience, we'll get right on it. Fabrice Florin (WMF) (talk) 07:51, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Feedback on new message indicator

New message indicators for notifications tool

We would be grateful for your feedback on a proposed 'message indicator' feature for this notifications tool.

The purpose of this feature is to better inform people who might have missed the red badge that now lights up when you have new notifications. It aims to address concerns raised on this page about removing the OBOD in this version of the tool, as discussed above.

To that end, we have prepared a special discussion page with four different options for this proposed message indicator. Each option includes a design mockup, key features, as well as pros and cons. We think any of the first four options can be developed quickly this week, and have the potential to provide the same benefits as the OBOD, without some of its drawbacks.

Please share your feedback on that discussion page, so we can collaboratively identify the most practical solution together.

We plan to develop and release a new message indicator this week, based on your comments and our development team's recommendations.

Thanks for your guidance. Fabrice Florin (WMF) (talk) 05:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

page links for chosen pages

I'd like an option to extend the Page Links feature to pages I choose and to delete pages from that list. I think I virtually created an article by converting a redirect into a full article, but someone else created the redirect. I don't know if there's a page I'd want to not know this about, but I might lose interest in an active page and then I might want it off my list. Nick Levinson (talk) 14:13, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

That's a good idea :). I'm not sure how creative we can get with this sort of thing - although it'd certainly be nice. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:34, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Prototype enhancements - an update

Hey all :). I've just posted an update to the discussion page about the new messages indicator that should explain what we're doing right now, and what you can expect from us in the coming days (hint: lots of fun prototypes). If you've got any questions, or want to think about my discussion points, drop them there or send me a message :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:12, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

FYI-does Visual Editor impact any of what you are doing here?

FYI Visual Editor is coming — Maile (talk) 01:20, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Yep, we're well aware of it :). There shouldn't be any conflict between it and Echo, no. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 01:32, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Talk page changes

This seems to have got rid of the old "Your talk page has changed" message - is that correct? If so, is there any way to restore it? It was far more noticeable than a little (1) next to my user name. An optimist on the run!   22:36, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Not at the moment, no. In my interface, at least, I find the use of red (very rare on WP) to be pretty prominent. We may, if there's a really substantial dislike of this format, introduce a full opt-out - but anything like that we do introduce will only be temporary. In the long term, this feature isn't going away. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:02, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Why isn't going away? What makes you sure about that? The money already spent on this? --Eingangskontrolle (talk) 19:52, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't engage with bad-faith questions; drop me a message on my talkpage when you can behave productively. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 20:35, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

I agree that discoverability of the red badge isn't the best. On a related note: I have a few notifications and getting back to the red badge after I scroll down is quite problematic. We may need to re-visit the conversation around some minimal amount of persistence for the top right navigation, so its always visible. Vibhabamba (talk) 23:19, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

For my own use, I don't mind the notifications, but for new users who are being warned, the Orange bar needs to be returned. To be honest, I'd be happy if users who received a warning had a page-filling orange/red/flashing notification, so that way they'd be less likely to ignore it. But if new users were not noticing the orange bar before, they're certainly not going a small flag in the top right. Being told that you have a new message on your talk page should be bold and dramatic, not subtle. That is, the orange bar should be the default, and the notifications form should be the opt-in. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:47, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not expecting the new feature to "go away", but it should supplement the existing functionality, not replace it. An optimist on the run!   08:07, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I agree. I've commented below about the problems of getting contact with some new users already - perhaps OBOD could be kept for those new accounts recent enough to be monitored in the list of Edits by New Accounts, or less than however many months old. Peridon (talk) 12:44, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

The talk page notification isn't prominent enough, and from what I've read it looks like there is nothing to distinguish new messages from other non-urgent notifications. Peter James (talk) 13:15, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I like the new feature for some purposes, but those orange notifications are I think essential -- as an admin who receives a number of such talk p. messages a day I need to know about them in an absolutely unmistakable fashion immediately, and in dealing with a relatively inactive user, I need to be quite sure they will see my message as soon as they return to WP. I can adjust to noticing it myself however it is sent, but the new user problem is a really serious one for my work--and I think it would be for the work of anyone trying to help new users. DGG ( talk ) 18:06, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

The more I use it, the more I even dislike it for myself, as DGG says. This new feature is going to have a very, very negative effect on good faith but misguided new users. Before, if a new user is breaking the rules in some way that matters, I could leave them a message and, at least sometimes, they'd see the orange bar and then a conversation would start. Now, I'm going to leave them messages/warnings, and there's nearly 100% certain not to see them, and then eventually they're going to be blocked for what seems like to them no reason at all. Only then will they find out that someone's been trying to talk to them. That's extremely harsh. The orange bar MUST come back, ideally immediately, at worst case, within a few days. Editor retention is allegedly one of the WMF's big things, right? Qwyrxian (talk) 14:20, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

How to turn this off

I've unchecked all the options in my preferences, and I've asked for no email notifications, but I'm still getting notifications via the number next to my name. Can this be turned off completely? SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:34, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

New messages on your user talk page can't be turned off since the orange message bar was removed. Ryan Vesey 01:38, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

That's a pity. The orange bar was much more noticeable, which is important for new users. I'm also not keen on having to go to a special page to view the messages so that the notifications go away. Can we not have an opt-in/out option for this? SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:55, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

See #Does the OBOD have to go? Personally, if it's not too difficult for the devs, I think it would be great to have an option to choose between echo notifications and the orange bar for talk page messages. I love the new notification system, but I'd prefer to keep the orange bar for talk page messages. Ryan Vesey 02:10, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Different strokes for different folks. I think the removal of the orange bar is the greatest thing ever. I hope I never see it again. Viriditas (talk) 03:46, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

So far, using #pt-notifications { visibility: hidden; } in my skin css file works on making it invisible. There is a resulting empty space though.--Rockfang (talk) 04:16, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

• As said above, we can potentially introduce an opt-out if there's strong user demand for it - but any opt-out would be temporary. Eventually, Echo will be here for all users in some form. Right now I think we'd probably do better focusing on ways to make talkpage notes more prominent; does anyone have any suggestions on that front? Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 04:20, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Is that a threat? I think the community has to asked before the final introduction. --Eingangskontrolle (talk) 20:01, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

What about - and I'm just spitballing here - a banner that appears at the top of every page a user sees until they visit their talkpage? It could be an eye-catching colour - orange, say - and could have a couple of useful links, like the user's talkpage and talkpage history. I know that's a bit of a left-field idea, but I'm sure it couldn't be that hard to code... Yunshui 雲‍水 13:19, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

• • Where can I sign up for the opt-out? I'm not a fan of things becoming more social media-esque. Thanks, — -dainomite   07:46, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
    • At the moment, if you go to Special:Preferences you'll see an "echo" tab - you can opt out of most things (by which I mean "everything but talkpage messages") there. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 15:29, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I want this off my page - I do actually know what my watchlist is for. I also want the prominent orange Talk page post notification back like it used to be. Have you people seriously not learnt a single thing from the Watchlist War of a year ago? We were then promised that all future user interface changes will include an opt-out. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:16, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Old notifications

Like pretty much everyone else, I really like the core idea, and I'm thankful to have it. I'm simply curious about old notifications — is there some way to get rid of them, or will they just sit there indefinitely? I've looked everywhere without finding the answer to my question, which by the way isn't at all a big deal; I'd just like to know what to do or to know that it can't be done. Nyttend (talk) 20:06, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

As you get new notifications, they fall down into the archive page. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 20:14, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

No, I mean: will going to Special:Notifications show everything by default or will old ones disappear eventually by themselves, and is there a way to cause old ones to disappear from Special:Notifications? Nyttend (talk) 20:17, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

They don't currently have a set lifetime, but presumably at some point they will get one to stop stored data growing forever. How long would an old one potentially be interesting to you? A week? A month? A year? LWelling (talk) 20:37, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Probably not very long; I'll generally deal with it and forget it. Nyttend (talk) 20:54, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Also, the fact that there ARE notifications is probably the most important aspect here. If they have become automatically archived, then that's likely fine, as long as it tells you that it has automatically archived something, I presume. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 23:04, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

From my perspective, I would like to see the inline notifications window remove notices as soon as I've acknowledged them. A link to Special:Notifications would be sufficient for accessing old notices at a later point, I would think. Resolute 17:08, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Allegedly, "Special:Notifications is a pretty replacement of Special:Log" "the idea was to make it [Special:Notifications] more friendly than Special:Log". See mw:Talk:Echo_(Notifications)/Feature_requirements#Bad_requirements:_reinventing_logs_and_private_notifications. --Nemo 08:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Why are you quoting yourself? Kaldari (talk) 03:09, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Because I thought link was enough for context, but I can quote someone else if you prefer; done now. --Nemo 12:56, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Other Wikis

Many users of the Chinese Wikipedia(including me) want to try this in Chinese Wikipedia. Would you mind installing this function in Chinese Wikipedia? Thanks!--Carrotkit (talk) 15:24, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I believe Echo will eventually be rolled out to all the other projects; they're launching it here first to work out the kinks before it goes live everywhere else. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:47, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

You'll forgive my lack of technical knowledge, but somehow, it seems like less than a best practice to test software on the largest live installation of it. Least of all because privacy vulnerabilities, like I identified above, will have the largest negative effect on the largest installation. Also possibly because waiting for changes, like a more prominent notice, will have the largest negative effect if something is installed on the largest project first. MBisanz ^talk 15:50, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Valid points, but it's also the largest user base, which means the broadest amount of feedback; implementing on a smaller wiki would potentially mean that issues could go undiscovered for much longer. (I've beta tested software and developed websites; trust me, the more eyes you have on something, the better) Plus, I would imagine that there's a certain value in all the feedback being in a single language, rather than trying to track and translate criticism and suggestions in a dozen+ languages. That alone would slow down the development time significantly, I would guess. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:58, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

So I understand you want to talk in English only, because the developers are not able/willing to make a conversation in another language? --Eingangskontrolle (talk) 20:28, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

That's absolutely nothing to do with our rationale. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 20:34, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

To translate the above, "yes" — after all, "never believe anything until it's been officially denied". Of course, there's also the fact that the Foundation doesn't really care about projects other than the English Wikipedia, since that's what accounts for the overwhelming majority of traffic. --108.38.191.162 (talk) 21:41, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm just not seeing how commons + meta + en.wiktionary (which probably have an aggregate of 1/4 the highly active users of enwiki) wouldn't have spotted the problems we uncovered so far. Then again, I also don't see why it couldn't be rolled back temporarily when it was realized the problems we uncovered would take longer than a weekend to fix, because now lots of people here are missing lots of messages and we do have an old system that at least notified some of them. MBisanz ^talk 16:02, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to try this. Some Wikipedians thought Wikipedia will be slimier to Facebook if there is the Echo. An user said he doesn't want to look at the notifications. Maybe we can open this function, still we let users to try this or not. Sorry for my Chinglish...--Carrotkit (talk) 06:53, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Allow CSS customisation of "(1)"

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T50165

I've just had "(1)" showing at the top of my screen for several hours without realising it. I'm surprised MediaWiki doesn't do anything to draw a notification to my attention, and this definitely needs improvement (several people are already discussing this above).

Anyway, I wanted to fix this myself with a bit of user CSS. Looking at the HTML source, however, I can't see any class= or id= to indicate new notifications. The only difference in the page is the content (i.e. "(1)" instead of "(0)"). There is nothing I can use to write a CSS rule to be triggered by new notifications.

Hence, I'd like to suggest an enhancement to Echo: When the count of new notifications is non-zero, add a class that CSS can use to format the link differently. For example, when there are no new notifications, the HTML source would look like this (i.e. the same as it does now):

<li id="pt-notifications"><a href="/wiki/Special:Notifications" title="Your notifications">(0)</a></li>

When there is a new notification, the HTML source could look like this (note the added class="new-notifications"):

<li id="pt-notifications" class="new-notifications"><a href="/wiki/Special:Notifications" title="Your notifications">(1)</a></li>

– PartTimeGnome (talk | contribs) 23:06, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

There is a CSS class which you can use; it is added dynamically by javascript, so you may have looked in the HTML source instead of the rendered DOM source. Anyway, look for the .mw-badge-important class, which makes the background red. — Edokter (talk) — 00:06, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for that. Unfortunately that isn't much use to me because I have scripts disabled. This also explains why I don't see the "red square" others have mentioned. I guess this is an interim measure until the devs give us something better? Since the number of notifications is known when the server serves the page, I don't see why the class can't already be on the page when it is served. (Except of course that a developer needs to change the server-side code, whereas any admin can write JS.) – PartTimeGnome (talk | contribs) 15:21, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Please file a bug in Bugzilla (if there isn't one already). --MZMcBride (talk) 04:25, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

 Done – PartTimeGnome (talk | contribs) 19:44, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

New red notice box is double plus less good than OBOD

I'm not sure if this is being discussed above, and if it is, someone can point me to it, but the new red "pop up" box that shows up to let you know about new notifications es no bueno. We don't need a giant screaming red box for every new notification. We need a giant screaming red (or orange, I'm not picky) box for new messages. I don't need to be intrusively reminded that someone linked to an article on my watchlist, and I don't think new users to either. I merely need that level of notification only when someone leaves a message on my User talk: page. That's why we need the OBOD back to its old functionality. The new red box isn't very helpful, and I think that all users (especially new users) would benefit from Echo (which I still like a lot) with the Orange "you have messages" box implemented. This new development isn't as good, as it notifies users of too much stuff. There needs to be something special and different for new user talk messages, not for every unread notification. --Jayron32 06:43, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

You can turn it off: MediaWiki:Gadget-Notification. It's primarily to ensure new users don't miss talkpage messages (and they won't get many other notifications). Rd232 ^talk 09:05, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

I think you miss my point. I'm not particularly concerned about my experience; I think this feature isn't helpful for the bulk of Wikipedia editors in general, and feel that the best possible solution isn't this red box, but rather an intrusive notification about talk page messages only (i.e. the Orange Box or something very like it) working in conjunction with the notification system. I recognize I, as an experienced user, has possibilities to customize my Wikipedia user interface. The vast bulk of users do not, and I don't particularly like how this particular feature would work for them. --Jayron32 13:15, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

I fully agree that a new-messages-specific notification would be better, but that rather fell by the wayside—User:Writ Keeper isn't fully comfortable with his orange-bar script being default on. This was intended to be a sort of compromise, I think—and a good compromise leaves no-one happy. Ignatzmice•talk 13:21, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, being triggered by talkpage messages only would be better. But bear in mind that the vast majority of users won't get very many non-talkpage notifications - it's very different for highly active long-term editors. Rd232 ^talk 13:24, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Furthermore, if we are going to have a red box show up, why can't we click through it directly to whatever we're being notified? Why is it necessary to click the number? Having an attention getting that redirects you somewhere else seems to partially defeat the purpose of the attention getter. Not to mention I think the way the notification dropdown itself works isn't really user friendly: to get to the talk page section edited, you need to click a little teeny arrow that took me a while to find, and there's no choice at all, as far as I can see, to view a diff. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 14:42, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

I think that may be because of an Echo bug (#Cannot reset number by going to page) - it doesn't know you've visited your talkpage if you don't go through the red box. Rd232 ^talk 15:03, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

The big attention-getter is a superficial workaround; it only reads Echo, it doesn't affect it. I suppose it's theoretically possible to tie it in more directly, but that's probably more than Edokter wants to take on. And it runs the risk of actually breaking things. Ignatzmice•talk 16:51, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

It's more than theoretically possible; that's what my OBoD script does. It scans the unread Echo notifications for any talk page messages, posts the OBoD if there are any, and then when you go to your talk page, it goes through and marks all the talk-page-message notifications read. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:53, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

But that's just reading and writing variables, yes? The idea (which is a good idea) is to make clicking the pop-up do the same thing as clicking the number. Which would be more difficult, I believe. Ignatzmice•talk 16:56, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

No, when you visit your talk page with my script installed (and with unread-talk-page notifications), your little red Echo notification number will go down, and the notifications within it will really be marked read. It might not be visible at first; it happens after the notification number is loaded, so the number won't change until you reload the page. But you can see for yourself: with an unread talk-page notification, go to your talk page with my script and then go to a different page without touching the Echo notification bubble; your number of new notifications will go down accordingly. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:01, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Right, yes, but you're only changing various variables—the underlying stuff. I believe what Heimstern was saying was either a) make clicking the popup take you to the page/diff in question (which would be difficult, 'cause what if there are more than one) or b) make clicking the popup show the flyout. Ignatzmice•talk 17:04, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Prototypes released

See this thread; User:Kaldari has written several prominent replacements for talkpage notifications. Test however many you can, play around with them and let me know what you think. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 14:08, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

:I'm in Modern skin. Tried E and F, and on my skin they both look exactly like what we already have. Maybe it's the skin. I appreciate all the time and effort everyone is putting out to give us something workable. But all of this is just adding steps to what used to be so simple in accessing talk page messages. The OBOD was a one-step click to access talk page messages. When the teensy red pipe was added, it became a two-step process. Now the notification makes it a three-step process. Click the big notification to find out you have to go over and click on the red pipe, only to also click again on your talk page to get the messages. — Maile (talk) 14:46, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Please tell me that you're kidding. Does the new notification only tell you to check your notifications because one of them is an edit to your talk page? --Onorem♠Dil 14:48, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

:::That's how it works for me. When the new notification comes up, if I click it, look at it and click it again, it just goes away - it's nothing but an alert to tell me to look at the red pipe notification. The new notification has no link for me to click. — Maile (talk) 14:50, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

• Apparently, it wasn't working at all when I posted the above. Now it works fine. I don't know why. But inbetween the above posting and now, I've been offline. That's the only thing I can think of. — Maile (talk) 17:48, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

My $0.02

Just wanted to drop by some quick feedback, nothing more than my $0.02 on the Echo system as it is now:

• We really need diffs in the emails, else they're kinda useless; (T48937)
• The subject of the email could include the language and project this refers to for when this will be spread to other wikis (this would be really useful for filters);
• There should be a way to avoid getting notices of when bots edit with the bot flag on, I keep seeing MiszaBot in the list of notifications; (T49910, T49946?)
• The "0" looks very out of place in a grey box;
• The new talkpage message popup thing seems not aware that I had already read said message: the big orange box of doom used to disappear if I visited my talk page; (T49912)
• The in the notification box are fairly pointless without diffs, I would say, as I have to track it down thru the history if it has since been reverted. (T50183)

All that said, it is a good concept and with some finetuning I'm sure it will turn into a userful tool :) Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 15:08, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

I just logged in and was confronted with the new big loud notification pop-up. Thank you. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 15:23, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

It is only a temporary measure until a final solution is implemented. — Edokter (talk) — 15:28, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Syndication Secret Token

With the watchlist, you can get your watchlist as a feed without being logged in.
May this feature be added to the notification system. (Quick/temp fix could be to reuse the watchlist token.) Thanks, 930913(Congratulate) 18:32, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Fabulous idea. Theopolisme (talk) 22:06, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

How would that work, exactly? Notifications are primarily web-based. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Short answer: notifications could also spit out an RSS feed, like many other MediaWiki things already do. Not sure if this actually needs security on it, but watchlist token would be one way to do it perhaps. Rd232 ^talk 23:07, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Ah, gotcha. Yep, iirc, that's being considered :). I thought you meant having notifications distributing watchlist changes, and got very confused ;p. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:11, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Proposal

Given recent events, I have created a proposal that I think might facilitate communication between the software development team and the community. ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 00:05, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

How can we get rid of this nonsense?

Just another gimmick with no value - if somebody would like to talk to me: my talk page is available for signed messages, which are recorded together with my answer (if any) --Eingangskontrolle (talk) 19:42, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

That's not the only feature of Notifications. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 20:06, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

You can't. They made a decision, and you're going to like it. --Onorem♠Dil 20:08, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Or alternately you can accept that it is impossible to build anything that pleases anyone, and allowing an opt-out to anything anyone could plausibly object to would end up being truly ridiculous. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 20:34, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

My reply answered the question. I'm not sure how your responses do. --Onorem♠Dil 21:27, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, one of them was to you, so not intended to ;p. His question was based, by his statement, on the premise that talkpage messages were the primary (or sole) purpose of notifications. This is false. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:49, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Who has asked for this change? Or was it just another project (image filter 2) to keep employment high in headquarters? What are the real advantages? --Eingangskontrolle (talk) 20:39, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Me, and I like it. Surprise surprise (I'm not Cilla Black, honest) few people actually hate it enough to waste their life bitching about it. Some love it, some hate it, most will just get on with doing whatever it is they do without being quite nasty and pissing off the developers for no good reason other than someone stole their comfort blanket. Nick (talk) 20:46, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

The only thing I have noticed about this change that I do like is that it notifies me if I am mentioned directly in some discussions. Other than that its pretty much a pointless waste of time and in most cases makes things worse rather than better. Notifications are easily missed, it doesn't go to IP's, I trigger it when I leave messages for myself, etc. The new edit section location is a pretty pointless one as well as is the new Login page layout that looks pretty much identical to Facebook. What's next? Are we going to force "Timeline"? Or start adding like buttons to all the articles? I am all for the WMF stepping up and making decisions but I feel as though good programmers and dollars went to waste developing useless features here. There is an incredibly long list of other features and improvements that people have been asking for that have gone completely unanswered and undone. To have these unwanted and rather pointless changes being forced upon us is frustrating and pretty disrespectful of our time as volunteers. I really do have all the respect in the world for the programmers and folks that worked on these changes but they are just a waste of time and more thought should have gone into the planning of do we need them prior to development. Kumioko (talk) 21:28, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

The login page being more Facebook like is a stroke of genius, Facebook, Google, Yahoo, LinkedIn, these companies spend more on their user interface design (and associated research) than WMF spends in total, it's probably not a daft idea to incorporate elements of FB, Google etc into the design of MediaWiki/Wikimedia sites. The FB login page isn't laid out the way it is just to look pretty, it's the product of careful design and research, all designed to look less intimidating, to be easier to use for visually impaired users, to work better on mobile devices, and more besides, no doubt. For veteran editors, yeah, it's going to be anything from a minor inconvenient to a real wrench to tear themselves away from the 1990s/2000s user interface with OBOD and the old login screen (which a lot people will only see a dozen times a year) and work with something more up to date, but at the same time, the olde fashionede appearance of WP prior to Echo was undoubtedly making it difficult for newer editors more familiar with Facebook, Google+ and the like to feel entirely at home here. Having to sign and date this post is completely counter intuitive when you're used to Facebook adding your name and time to the left of every comment you make, FB does it automatically, WP has four tildes and an army of bots to let people know who left the comment on their talk page.

The edit link being directly adjacent to the section title instead of over to the right is simply to bring en.wp into line with most other sites, to make it easier to chop and change from one site to the next. It's good to get people contributing to Commons, to Wikinews, to all the other sites they want to, and to make it as easy as possible to slip slide from one to the other. Nick (talk) 22:24, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

I really don't mind the edit link or the new login page. I just hope a lot of time wasn't spent on them because we don't really gain anything. I also think that the new discussion method has some pluses but getting rid of the orange bar and replacing it with a tiny number with a red background that doesn't comply with generally accepted design medthodologys is not beneficial. Many people cannot see red or green so these colors should be avoided for notifications. Burnt orange like the bar is better. The size, location and obviousness is also a problem. Its too small and hiding it in the midst of the links at the top is asking for people to ignore it. The location and implementation were not well thought out regardless of what bugs it fixes. Additionally, there is a long list of other problems that should have taken precedance. With all that said and as I have said before I am glad the WMF is making some decisions and I wish they would make more since we as a community have shown we aren't capable of doing it. The WMF may have asked if we hadn't shown so precisely over the years that we cannot make decisions. We deserve whatever we get until we do. Since I am complaining here is what I would have done with the notification. Allow people to choose a couple options under gadgets. I would have let the orange bar be an option but if its a matter of location mabe placing it in the empty are to the left of the login name and other links at the top of the page would be better. It doesn't need to be as big as the orange bar but even Facebook has a larger more obvious number and notification that what we implemented here. Additionally, we are not google or facebook so we do not need to change things just to be like them. We are still one of the most visited websites and IMO its largely because we don't implement uselss changes often and we have a decent layout that's fairly easy to understand and use. We should not mess with what we have unless there is a good reason to do so. Kumioko (talk) 13:13, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

To answer your general question: Echo/Notifications derives from T34281, and is or will be the answer to many bugs. PS It's not actually compulsory, even for German Wikipedians, to throw in gratuitous references to image filters when complaining about WMF development activity. Rd232 ^talk 23:04, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Note

Hey all. Just wanted to let you know that Oliver will be taking some time away from this discussion. He took the weekend off (as he should), but the cumulative energy he's put in over the past week has left him a bit burnt out. The other folks on the team will be continuing the discussion. Howief (talk) 12:41, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Good to hear. Enjoy the time off. Take as much as you need. --Onorem♠Dil 16:52, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

If that was meant to sound as snarky as it does, it doesn't have any place in this discussion. -Pete (talk) 16:57, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

It's a bit snarky, but also serious. He should take off as much time as he needs. --Onorem♠Dil 17:03, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Sorry to hear that. I'm afraid I can't refrain from pointing that this is a direct consequence of refusing to allow everyone (community, devs, WMF team) the time to handle this calmly and methodically, by temporarily reinstating the OB while replacements for the OB are developed. It's an appallingly bad call, but one which even now could still be reversed to good effect. Rd232 ^talk 17:01, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Very much agree with what RD232 says. Even if it takes a month, it will be better to get back to the orange bar before we make a new stab at moving forward with the new technology. (There is no reason it would take a month, obviously.) But compared to what, 8 or 9 years of both occasional and regular users developing an understanding of how notifications work, a temporary disruption is just that -- temporary. Shorter is better than longer, but if it has to take some time to get the point through, so be it. -Pete (talk) 17:05, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I also agree. Kumioko (talk) 19:22, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

So long as I get to keep the red box in the meantime rather than the horrendously ugly orange bar. Silverseren^C 19:33, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Silver, wouldn't you agree that the personal preferences of those few of us involved in the discussion are a poor basis for sweeping decisions? I don't particularly like the orange bar either, and will be very happy when we have a legitimate path to something better. But for the time being, it has the advantage of being the only notification system known to humankind to have supported the production of a 4 million article encyclopedia. -Pete (talk) 23:36, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Onorem, Pete, Rd232, Kumioko, Silver, I'm sure you'e seen this, but just in case, there are details below on the IRC chat Fabrice is holding (happening now). I'd encourage you to participate in that chat -- they'll be discussion the various options and how to go forward. Howief (talk) 20:17, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Howie, but I think the most significant question before us is whether something needs to be done about a choice the by the Editor Engagement Team to disregard consensus. Since that's not the main agenda item of the chat, I am not sure there's anything to be gained from participating. -Pete (talk) 20:24, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. IRC is a no-go for me. It's just never going to happen. (And options going forward won't change based on my input so why bother?) --Onorem♠Dil 20:43, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I just wanted to sincerely thank you for the invitation but I didn't find out until late last night it even occurred. Kumioko (talk) 16:19, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Too fast notification about new notifications

The pop-up about me having new notifications showed itself just for like 1 or 2 secs. I have managed to get through You have new notifications. Click the red numb... when it disappeared. Is it the right speed? Can I change it somewhere? Preferences tab stays silent and with this it seemed to me I need at least two more those pop-ups to get to the end of it :D --18:10, 9 May 2013 (UTC), Utar (talk)

We are likely to be providing other gadgets which persist, so you wont have to play catchup with the disappearing notice Vibhabamba (talk) 18:46, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation issue

So I'm seeing notifcations such as:

Joe Decker mentioned you on Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Hagyó.

"Declining submission: undefined (AFCH)"

Except that none of that users' edits to that page actually appears to mention me. Stuartyeates (talk) 20:04, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

This is because in that edit he modified the {{afc submission}} template, which resulted in your linked username being moved around--which the Echo parser/checker picks up as a mention. Smells like a bug. Theopolisme (talk) 21:06, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Talk page mentions, ANI and interaction bans

Wikipedia:Notifications says it will notify you of mentions on other talk pages. How is it decided which namespaces it scans for mentions? Is it just Talk: and User talk: or would this be customisable?

Currently, WP:ANI requires that users be notified about threads created about them. If they were notified automatically if they were linked, this would reduce the need to leave them a "Hey, you're at ANI" post. Which is particularly useful as there are users with interaction bans, and telling someone that there's an ANI thread about them is technically interacting.

(Also, we should probably work out whether the new notification system affects how interaction bans are handled.) —Tom Morris (talk) 15:50, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Customisable, I believe :). And, yeah, ANI is actually the first use case I thought of! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 17:22, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

• Would we be able to add alternate names it can check too? For example, people are likely to refer to me as simply "Crisco" — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:23, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

• Probably not, I'm afraid - but it requires formal linking to your userpage anyway, so it probably won't work out as "every time someone mentions Crisco" (which is good!). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 10:18, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

• That would be a... small price to pay. Especially since I could probably turn that page off. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:07, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

• Indeed. On the other hand Many people refer to me as "Worm", but I'd be a little worried if ever instance of someone typing "Worm" came up. One thing I'd be curious about is the criteria which would be used for notification, would the words "Worm That Turned" cause a notification or would it require a link to User:Worm That Turned? Worm^TT(talk) 10:17, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

• The latter :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 10:18, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, I edit conflicted... I was going to say "Never mind, my questions are answered at the place where I should have looked" Worm^TT(talk) 10:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

• So this means I can't get all the hot gossip about me? I doubt those who are into throwing stones in glass houses will link names all the time. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:07, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

• Would it still notify Crisco if I linked his userpage like this? Mohamed CJ (talk) 19:48, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Most probably; you can go to MediaWiki.org and check! It's live there now :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 20:24, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

• Kinda technical question, It works with links to a user page, does it also parse templates that generate user page links (IE {{user}} et al )? Werieth (talk) 20:48, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

  Good question! I'll try and find out :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:01, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

  It would be good to know the answer to this - because I could see something like a mention template being pretty useful. (See also Wikipedia:Village_pump_(idea_lab)#Making_the_best_use_of_notifications) WaggersTALK 13:25, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

How soon can we get the Wikipedia namespace turned on? I think it would be really helpful for those of us who participate in many different discussions. Viriditas (talk) 04:32, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

It is on, Viriditas. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 05:02, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Only for talk. Noticeboard discussions don't take place in talk. Viriditas (talk) 05:06, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

It must be on because I received a user mention notification from a WP:RfA in the Wikipedia namespace. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 23:33, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Can you point me to the exact thread, please? Viriditas (talk) 09:26, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Other talk page mentions

Could a feature that allows a user to add other users to a list so they could be notified if mention is made of a user on their list be developed and incorporated? Would this be desirable to anyone other than me? My76Strat (talk) 20:13, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Seems like the potential for wikihounding is a bit too great. —Theopolisme (talk) 22:36, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

My thinking precisely! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:01, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

User mentions have potential...

With this edit, my bot account mentioned me without even visibly showing my username and I still received a notification. This could potentially be used for a form of "talkback", where a special template could be used to notify the person that you are replying to. For example, a user replying to me could put something like {{Reply|The Anonymouse}} at the beginning of their reply. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 06:07, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I've already found myself using this. +1 for killing big blue talkbacks once and for all. Theopolisme (talk) 11:00, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Yay! Flow will actually handle this too, but it's good we could come up with half a solution (albeit accidentally!) so early :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 14:42, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

+1 to using notifications to elimininate the need for talkback. -Pete (talk) 18:32, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

OK - what is this Swiss flag thing with numbers on? I've seen odd things in Afd pages and so on on other language Wikipedias, but not this one. Peridon (talk) 18:59, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

It's from Google+. There's a similar template at {{like}}. Ignatzmice•talk 21:50, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't think you'll find me using it, then... Peridon (talk) 10:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

User:Technical 13/+3 I like the idea of {{talkback}} going bye-bye. Technical 13 (talk) 19:14, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

• Could a bot be coded to migrate all instances of {{reply}} to {{talkback}} so this opportunity can appear in that template? Ryan Vesey 19:17, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I could do that with AWB, if it was agreed to be a good idea. Technical 13 (talk) 19:29, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
  • More-over, I think this proposal would be best served if all of the templates listed on http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Talkback&hidetrans=1&hidelinks=1 where changed to use {{Talkback}} directly (and then fix the template itself to have it stop telling people they can use {{tb}}). Technical 13 (talk) 21:49, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

    The shorter the better. {{tb}} seems good. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 05:30, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

@The Anonymouse, Theopolisme, Peteforsyth, Technical 13, and Ryan Vesey: What do you guys think of this {{replyto}} template? Just a little experiment :) Should it also have a 'hide=true' parameter? Kaldari (talk) 06:33, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Looks good! The hide parameter could be useful. Also, maybe we could get {{Rt}} to redirect to it. Finally, should this template be made for substituting or transcluding? The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 06:39, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

I added the hide parameter. Personally, I like transcluding it. It keeps the discussion easier to read in the Wikitext, but maybe some people will want to subst. Either way, it should work. Kaldari (talk) 06:51, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Instead of {{rt}}, I redirected {{ping}} (which was a virtually unused talkback redirect). I'm wondering if the 'hide' option will be confusing to people, as they will come to the conversation looking for where they are mentioned, and might be confused if they can't see it. Thoughts? Kaldari (talk) 07:41, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

@Kaldari: At first glance I like it, but I am getting a little concerned about the number of common use cases being brought up for discussion, that seem to be coming across as new ideas. I'd like to wrap my head around the overall structure a little better, before commenting about specific ones. Above all, I'll be much more comfortable discussing new features once previous features are unbroken. -Pete (talk) 20:39, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

User:Waggers/sandpit/mention I wasn't aware of this discussion until now (or the {{replyto}} template) but as you can see, have come up with something similar-but-different. The intention is that this lives at {{mention}}. There's also a similar discussion now at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(idea_lab)#Making_the_best_use_of_notifications. WaggersTALK 13:42, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Is there a way for a mention to notify all watchers of a page? For example, Anna Frodesiak, who is ill, posted a message requesting talk page stalkers. Is it conceivable that she could activate a template that would notify all watchers of her talk page? Or something along those lines. For example, lets say a user goes on vacation. Could they notify all watchers of their user talk page through a global mention? Viriditas (talk) 08:07, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

It's a cool idea, although I wonder if people would consider it spammy. Kaldari (talk) 19:38, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

In that case, what about user status updates that can interface with notifications that will allow watchers to opt-in to these updates? Viriditas (talk) Today, 23:36 (UTC−4)

The only problem I see with this idea is that it would open a door offering a way for people to see who is watching what pages. I've seen lots of discussion and debate about that (I think at least admins, if not all trusted users, should be able to see who is watching a page anyways). Technical 13 (talk) 17:30, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

@Eloquence, Fabrice Florin (WMF), Vibhabamba, Kaldari, Howief, and Tychay: Are mentions on by default? That is, if I ping a newbie in a reply on my talk page, do I need to give them a talkback or does it not matter (they'd just get two notifications instead of one)? Ignatzmice•talk 12:18, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

They are on by default.--Eloquence* 15:34, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, Ignatz, mentions are on by default for all new users, with both web and email notifications. For current users, they are only on by default for web notifications, you have to opt-in to get email notifications. Read more in this feature requirement on default settings. Judging from the feedback we've received so far, this feature seems to be really handy for a variety of interactions. Enjoy ... :) Fabrice Florin (WMF) (talk) 16:11, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Update on talkpage notifications

Hey all. The Editor Engagement team spent almost all of yesterday working on ways to resolve the issue of talkpage notifications and the prominence problems around them. I'd hoped that they'd have been able to come up with something by the end of the day; I'm now being told that their timetable is "something by 2pm PST today". When I've got something to share, I'll share it.

On a personal note: I see a lot of people above complaining about "the developers". While I suspect this is just a catch-all for "the staffers involved", it sort of hurts to see the programmers blamed for what was ultimately a decision of product design - while developers did participate, it was mostly the visual designers and product managers. And I say this as someone who is most certainly not a developer. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 14:00, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the update, Oliver. Looking forward to seeing what you all come up with.

On the second note, I think it might help if you change the notification (watch list notification, I think) to say "Please let the Wikimedia Foundation know what you think" or similar, instead of "please let the developers know." I suspect we're all happy comply with however we should be addressing people. If I've contributed to this confusion, my apologies. -Pete (talk) 14:37, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

That makes sense; I'll ask someone to tweak it now (unless you want to? Admin and all :).) Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 15:54, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Looks like you, or somebody, already got to it -- and I'm glad, because "editor engagement team" is obviously the right phrasing, but it wasn't obvious to me until I saw it :) -Pete (talk) 16:31, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Heh! I poked people on IRC in the -admins channel; time to find out who did it so I can thank them :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 17:27, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

• Note: I'll be taking the day (and the weekend) off - several days of answering things constantly have got me kinda bushed :/. While I genuinely appreciate the feedback everyone has given, answering it for 15 hours straight isn't fun for anyone, and I don't want to be unnecessarily snarky or useless ;p. I have reason to believe that my boss will be participating if there are any concerns about my brief absence from the conversation, and I hope Vibha, Fabrice, Kaldari and Luke will continue chipping in. Thanks for understanding :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:01, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Yup. Oliver's been living on this page since Tuesday, and he really needs a break. So do all the other folks on the team. I've asked Oliver to take the weekend off (as he should do, normally) and we'll get back to discussing things on Monday. In the meantime, if anyone has anything that can't wait for a few days to be addressed, please mention me in your comment :). Howief (talk) 23:06, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
    • Um, wait one freakin' minute, @Howief: YES, we have something that can't wait. If you're going to leave this until next week, give us back the orange bar first. Just as a temporary measure. Or have you not seen the #Yes section? Ignatzmice•talk 23:20, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
      • Hey Ignatz. Yes, I've read the Yes section carefully, as well as all the other posts related to the orange bar. So has everyone who's worked on the feature. The team has been working hard since releasing earlier this week and could use some breathing room. I would really appreciate folks giving the team some space so we can resume the discussion fresh on Monday. Hope that's ok. Howief (talk) 01:51, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
        • I understand the coders need breathing room; no one operates well with constant yelling. What I don't understand is why the coders don't turn the orange bar back on while they are altering Echo to resolve the various issues. I'm not technically minded, but it seems like the existing Echo and existing orange bar system would coexist until Echo is modified to make it more prominent, address the IP issues, etc. The unwillingness to turning it back on while things are fixed makes people like me feel like the WMF isn't interested in doing what it can to support my editing, even if it must make changes to advance the software's progress. MBisanz ^talk 01:58, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
        • edit conflict; agree with MBisanzWell, Howie, I can't argue with that, or force you to keep working. Obviously you can't be expected to work 24/7. But you wouldn't have had all this blowback if you'd been clearer about the destruction of the orange bar. And—I keep asking this and not getting a response—we would like to know if there is a technical reason we can't have it back temporarily, or if you're all just being heavy-handed jerks. Ignatzmice•talk 01:59, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
          • In the world of software engineering, it's rarely as simple as flicking a switch. I daresay it is not a super difficult change to make, but not extremely easy either. It has to be carefully thought out and thoroughly tested (I'm sure you would be unhappy if stuff got completely broken along the way). Getting the orange bar and Echo to co-exist might be quite difficult; I don't know. Don't assume that the developers are being "heavy-handed" just because something doesn't come immediately. — This, that and the other (talk) 10:51, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
            • It was as simple as flicking a switch for the IP issue. Admittedly it might be harder for logged-in users because they have Echo as well. But I really am quite frustrated with the WMF team for not even answering questions about temporarily turning it back on. This question has been asked here (and here), here, here, here, here, here (and here), and the two replies above yours. In only one case was the actual question addressed: replying to the second diff, Okeyes said he thought it was just that the WMF liked it this way. I have yet to see anything from an actual developer telling me it's impossible to turn the orange bar on temporarily, and at this point, yes, I'm assuming they're just being pigheaded about it. Whatever the supposed issues were with it, there would be NO LOSS if they gave it back temporarily—unless there is a technical issue, which they've been careful to avoid talking about. Ignatzmice•talk 13:13, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
• I understand your point about beating up on the programmers, but "the developers" is not really wrong. In my book, developing requirements, specifications, designs, and implementations are all part of the product development process (as are testing and rollout regimes). End users who are unhappy with the result do not need to know about the stages of the development process, or the organization of the personnel involved, to say they think the developers goofed: it doesn't mean everybody involved is a goofball.

  In this case it appears that something users consider important was missing from the requirements, to wit: "You have mail" needs to be an alert that captures attention. It was a disappointing oversight given that this requirement was reasonably apparent from past experience with implementation details.[1] "Visual design" needs to serve "functional requirements".

  From a broader perspective, I think the people developing product requirements have got a lot of very good ideas regarding broad objectives, but even the best "big picture" thinking can miss important details about functional requirements. Developing detailed functional requirements is a tough job, but somebody has to do it. If I may offer one small piece of advice:  when developing functional requirements to enhance or replace existing features, take a deep look at what did work, deficient though it may have been, to uncover details of underlying, often unspoken, functional requirements that it served. Implementation details will have been worked out to meet those requirements. Though the implementation may be ready for the rubbish heap, it contains important clues about the needs it served, however well or poorly it served them. ~ Ningauble (talk) 17:22, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Missing notification types in preferences?

The preferences FAQ (Wikipedia:Notifications/FAQ) lists the following preferences for me:

1. Talk page messages: when a message is left on your user talk page (this replaces the orange bar that used to appear);
2. Mentions: when your user name is mentioned on a talk page;
3. Page reviews: when a page you created is reviewed (applies to new users only);
4. Page links: when a new link is made to a page you created;
5. Edit reverts: when your edits are undone or rolled back;
6. Thanks: when someone thanks you for your edit (coming soon);
7. User rights: when your user rights change;
8. Welcome: when you create a new account;
9. Getting started: when you have confirmed your email address.

However, Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo doesn't show me the last 4. I understand that the thanks bit isn't implemented yet, and since I've had this account for... wow, 4 years already? "welcome" and "getting started" are moot. But that still leaves "user rights" out in the cold. Is that notification planned? Something not all users get? (I'm not sure why some users wouldn't get a say on whether they're informed when they get new rights, in that case.) Or is the absence of the item on the preferences page an oversight? The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 14:03, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

It's planned and deployed, but it's not a class of message that you should be able to turn off (same as talkpage messages). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 14:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply. However, I do see a checkbox for email notifications of talkpage changes. I don't see one for webpage notifications, but it's not obvious to me whether that means "those are always on", "those are always off", or "we aren't telling". If the former two, a read-only checkbox (maybe with some explanation of why they're that way) would be nice, esp. since I do have control of email notifications. If the latter, I'm really curious why you think I don't need to know. (If the intended meaning is something else than the ones I listed, please elaborate.) Likewise, I'd like to know what the settings of webpage and email notifications are for the options not listed on the page are, whether I can change them or not. And if I can't change either, an explanation of why would be nice to have. (For all of the above, that explanation might be in the FAQ instead of the notification preferences tab itself, but IMO the value of the settings should be given on the page itself. The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 14:59, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

"Always on"; it was actually planned to have a greyed-out checkbox, which should be in the next release, but we didn't have time to include it this time around. The options not listed on the page - welcome and getting started are (to my knowledge) one-time, web-only notifications: user rights, I believe, the same. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 15:47, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

I see the point for welcome and GS notifications being 1-time if the corresponding messages are going to be automated at all (I'm not sure how I feel about that, but that's a different discussion and moot for me anyway) since users should only get those messages once in that case, but I'm unclear what you mean by user rights being the same. Are you referring to one set of user rights that by its nature gets (eventually) granted to all or most users eventually, or are you saying I'll never see any notification after my first rights change, even if I'm granted other rights later? (This may make no sense, depending on whether/how/why/when new rights are granted - I'm not even sure which rights I have, what they're for, or why I should care whether/when mine change, unless it's because I did Something Bad.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by PauAmma (talk • contribs) 16:48, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Ugh, sorry; had a mental fail. User-rights messages are permanently on; the idea is that changes are important enough that, positive or negative, you should be aware of them. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:49, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Are there any plans to let users choose how they want those always-on notifications delivered? And likewise, will there be a web-only notification to talk page edits? The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 22:06, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

There is a web-only talkpage notification; that's the default :). I don't think there are any plans on that front - the web interface is always going to be the primary interface for notifications. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 13:06, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey, I'm on the E3 team responsible for the GettingStarted notifications. I wanted to note that they are sent to both web and email. Superm401 - Talk 22:29, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigations

The new notification system notifies people mentioned at WP:SPI, cf. [2]. This may or may not be a good thing, not as a technical but as an organizational matter.

One of the SPI "Important notes" says:

You can notify the suspected accounts by adding {{subst:socksuspectnotice|PUPPETMASTER}} ~~~~ to the bottom of their talk pages. (Notification is courteous but isn't mandatory, and in some cases it may be sub-optimal. Use your best judgement.)

Note the second sentence.

IMHO this otherwise worthwhile technical innovation shouldn't automatically circumvent that, and some deliberation is necessary on the matter. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 12:04, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I agree that this is a problem. The automatic notification about reverts could be problematic (or at least require changes in Wikipedia's processes) for similar reasons. It's almost like an invitation to edit warring. Hans Adler 18:47, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Interesting conundrum. Poor noticeability of badge at the top might be a feature in the instance of sockpuppets or vandals. LET'S KEEP THINKING POSITIVE, GUYS. :-) Killiondude (talk) 22:41, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

(Not speaking of the sock-puppetry concerns) Don't we want to let vandals know that their vandalism is not welcome here? How is this any different from template warnings? FallingGravity (talk) 23:08, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

The warnings make it clear that they can't simply re-revert. A neutral notification about a revert will be interpreted by some as confirmation of their idea that Wikipedia is some kind of neutral stage for edit wars in which the most persistent user wins. Hans Adler 16:48, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

In that case the revert notification should be shown in conjunction with a talk page warning notification (which I'm thinking they'd read first, unless you're one of those users who warn and then revert). Echo's not exactly replacing the old system of dealing with vandalism. FallingGravity (talk) 19:07, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I think you haven't understood the problem, which is when a user makes a more or less reasonable edit and is more or less reasonably reverted. Lots of edit wars happen in good faith on both sides, and even more do not come with any warnings at all, at least in the initial stages. Hans Adler 11:24, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Deletion

Is there notification if a page one created is deleted? -- Ypnypn (talk) 00:52, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Not at the moment, although it'd totally be worth building in. One of the things the team is going to work on, hopefully, is a notification when a page is tagged for deletion, so that users have an opportunity to check the article and make whatever tweaks are necessary. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:40, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

It's not really necessary - The Prod, Speedy and AFD templates all cause a notice to be posted the page creator. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:59, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't see why these are mutually exclusive. -- Ypnypn (talk) 19:48, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

It was on the shortlist, and once the UI settles down creating more notification types for events like this where there is a concrete way of detecting it happening is relatively straightforward. I hope there will be a lot more types added over time both to help regular contributors with workflow, and to encourage dabblers to become more regular. LWelling (talk) 20:44, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

All significant contributors to a page should be notified when it is tagged for deletion. The older a page is, the more likely that the original creator has retired or died. Such pages will have had many contributors and they should all be notified if they still seem to be active. Warden (talk) 09:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

I just wanted to say thanks for the new system. I really like it. The little red box is unobtrusive, yet easy to see on each page if one wants to check if they have messages, way more than the huge orange notification bar used to be. And it even lets you know who left a message and everything, making it easier to find on your talk page, rather than having to occasionally hunt around to figure out what section the message was added to like with the old system.

So, again, thanks! (I am sad that the day is quickly coming that I won't be able to use Classic though. :( ) Silverseren^C 03:30, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

• Hi Silver, you're very welcome. We're really glad that the new notifications tool works for you. We worked hard to provide more benefits than the big orange bar offered, such as the features you point out above. For now, as requested by other users, we have added a smaller 'orange bar of love' (obol) that still makes it very clear that you have new messages, but in a more integrated way than the previous implementation. We hope that this will work for you as well (we plan to offer a preference for it if it doesn't). Thanks again for taking the time to let us know the feature works for you, we appreciate it very much! Fabrice Florin (WMF) (talk) 22:23, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

  Actually, this is a rather painful response for me. What it says to me is: "We didn't want to fix the existing solution by enhancing it with the bits it was lacking, so we instead we created a new solution and implemented it with little or no initial community involvement, and now that we've gotten backlash and implemented that (by, effectively, co-opting the community-created 'fix' to our broken meddling) we're taking credit for it." 23.16.43.173 (talk) 03:36, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Mentions in Long Sections

I just received a notification left by a user > Clicking on my flyout dropped me within that section. The section was so long that I had no way of finding out what the notification was about. Are other people experiencing similar issues? We would like to solve for this in addition to the Show Diff solution. My need is: Get to the content, dont make me hunt in the section. I dont understand the show diff view. I know its super for power users. Discuss Vibhabamba (talk) 18:06, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I guess the long-term answer is flow. For now it's probably difficult to come up with something better than diffs, since individual posts don't leave html anchors. — HHHIPPO 19:13, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Do we get diffs currently? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:20, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Not at the moment; it's being worked on as we speak. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 19:21, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

While it is being worked on, we should have the feature that has been functional (if not ideal) for many years (the orange bar), as requested by strong consensus. -Pete (talk) 19:31, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Bot mentions

I'm getting constant notifications when User:AnomieBOT closes the FFDs and PUFs I've deleted. Is there any way to get rid of these so that I'm only notified of mentions by users? INeverCry 18:24, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I wonder if there could be some token or markup that suppresses a notification, which could be implemented by bots and the like when a notification is not desirable. {{noping}} could also then be used by editors, when notification is unwanted, such as the sockpuppet investigation cases mentioned above. 930913(Congratulate) 18:52, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

It may not be possible to get a customisable filter so that individual users could avoid being notified that sign bot has signed someone's post, or that the Signpost has landed on the mat or the little archiving bot has been at work. It would be nice, though. Not urgent, compared with the other problems, and one that was a part of OBOD before. Peridon (talk) 10:20, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

We're working on an 'ignore bot edits' thing, and/or a blacklist. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 19:22, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

No diffs

I was just wondering if there is any progress on restoring the orange bar, or adding diffs (preferably the orange bar). Retrieving messages is becoming a bit of a nuisance, especially where there are several, because we're having to go into the page history, and work out what the unread posts are. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 19:42, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't know what the official word is, but my user script (at User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/orangeBar.js) replicates the orange bar pretty exactly, including the diffs functionality, and it should now be as efficient as a script can be, and compatible with all browsers and skins (though that's still not thoroughly tested). Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:44, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

It's fantastic! I installed it and found out to my great pleasure today that it works. I've disabled the other notifications. SV, feel free to steal from this page. It's the second script. I'm pleased as punch. Truthkeeper (talk) 19:47, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi thanks Writ Keeper and TK, but I can't seem to get it to work – unless leaving notes for myself (as tests) don't count? SlimVirgin ^(talk) 20:06, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Nope, it doesn't (just as it didn't for the OG orange bar), but I just left you a note on your talk page, so let me know if you see it now. :) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:11, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Leaving notes for yourself won't trigger the new messages notification. --MZMcBride (talk) 20:11, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you both, it's working and feels like home again! :) SlimVirgin ^(talk) 20:18, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

• Re diffs, that functionality should be built into Echo soon. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 19:47, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Its time to let it go and accept the change

At this point it should be pretty clear to all that a decision has been made and whether we like it or not we are all stuck with it. Its been clearly stated that the WMF is not going to undo the change, nor should they. Its time to go back to our regularly scheduled programming and let the developers get back to coding. The more we drag them into these discussions that more time it takes them to finish the other dozens of projects that are currently in development. Kumioko (talk) 16:01, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more Mateng (talk) 16:14, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

+1 — Ganeshk (talk) 18:24, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your support and understanding, Kumioko, Mateng and Ganeshk! It means a lot to our team, which has been working around the clock for an entire week to resolve this issue; some of us spent all weekend and barely slept through it all, and we're all exhausted as a result. But we are glad that we were able to find an acceptable solution together -- and are even happier that it was solved as an active collaboration with community members. Going forward, we aim to expand on the methodology we used on this special discussion page for engaging a large group of community members in a first round of comments on proposed designs -- followed by rapid prototyping and real-time conversations with a smaller group to identify a final solution. Keep in mind that we all want the best for our users, and our team brings decades of experience in serving users through simple interfaces that reduce stress and reward productive behavior. So we all share the same goals as most community members, and are here to develop practical solutions to serve these goals in a timely manner, while modernizing Wikipedia's user interface to that end. In any case, thanks again for your encouragement -- and we look forward to our next collaborations! In the meantime, if anyone is interested, check out last night's webcast on Notifications, presented by yours truly and ace developer Ryan Kaldari, for your viewing pleasure (see PDF slides). Onward! Fabrice Florin (WMF) (talk) 18:46, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

?!? This sounds less like encouragement and more like resignation. Double sharp (talk) 16:48, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not going to respond to most of this, but I, too, have years of experience of professional website management (since 1994) and interface design; and I suspect that I'm not the only person commenting here who does. I don't, though, assume that that means I speak with any special privilege. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:55, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

The only thing really clear to me is that there is a pretty strong consensus, and it has not yet been implemented. There definitely has not been a decision made about changes to the notification feature that has any kind of legitimacy in Wikipedia's established process for making decisions. -Pete (talk) 20:33, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Regardless of the consensus I do not believe the developers are going to undo the change so there's no point in continue to drag them into discussions. Whether we like the change or not (I personally do not) I think the developers have conceded as much as they are going to do and further discussions are just bashing a deceased equine. Kumioko (talk) 20:54, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Can't fight the power, so why try. I have no trust in any username with (WMF) at the end these days in having my interest in mind. --Onorem♠Dil 01:34, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Few lines for our good OBoD

You have new messages (last change).

Some people call you the "orange bar of Doom"
But not everyone think so, I presume.
You had been a bar of Diligence, Dignity and Distinctive Demonstration,
You may say I'm a lover, but (here too) I am not the only one.

Apologies! I almost never comment on any software changes and try to concentrate on Wikipedia articles. But, this OBoD was too good and helpful. Ignore this section if you want! --Tito Dutta (contact) 08:01, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

+1. And this is why pinging someone with a shouting-out-for-attention orange bar is so much more effective than putting a note at a WikiProject talk page if you want to get a response. For the latter, all you get is a watchlist entry (and now an easy-to-miss tiny red square at the top of the screen); for the former, need I say more? Double sharp (talk) 14:24, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Copying my response from the comments page (posted after the notice was given to post here):

• Support Best possible. Consider: what do you want when you want a notification for talk pages, something very important? You want something persistent (it won't go away unless you check it!), clear (no confusion), and very prominent (harder to make up an excuse that you didn't see it). Also, you want IPs and registered users to have the same system. This way new users will be much less confused. Finally, you want it very accessible for such an important warning, so everything else is out (per others' comments). Which one of these has all these properties? Why, G, of course, our great Orange Bar.
  Now, what about the cons? Going through them, one by one:
  • (1) Too prominent/overwhelming Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think that is the point. If it isn't prominent enough, people will overlook it. Talk page messages are important. If they are overwhelming, at least everyone will see them, as much as they might complain about its overwhelmingness, and isn't that the point of a talk page notification? If they are not overwhelming enough, some will overlook it, and that is bad.
  • (2) Bad UI / visual design Maybe so if it were not for something this important, but its colour and size make it obvious. I would submit that the obviousness must be retained.
  • (3) Does not belong in article content So? It's not intrusive. The title is bolded in the lead, after all! If you are that interested in the article, "Open in new window / tab" and the back button exist for a reason.
  • (4) Annoys many users See (1). It's the point. Perhaps it is annoying, but ask yourself: would you reply to your talk page messages if it were not? Consider: which are you more likely to respond to, a message posted on your talk page (and on several other fellow WikiProject members), or one posted on a WikiProject page? Granted that you probably watch the latter, but which will you notice first? And will you not feel it as more personalized?
  • (5) Discourages use of new tool Not a bad thing IMHO, if the new tool is not as good as the old one. As to why I feel that is the case, see above.
• Oh, and since some have mentioned this: I would prefer keeping it orange. Warning colour do wonders in getting people to pay attention – but only if the area of warning colour is large and prominent enough (in response to those who would otherwise respond that the notifications have a red square). Double sharp (talk) 14:51, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
  • One thing I neglected to mention: this is the only one that gives a link to the diff, which is great if the new response is buried early in a subsection, with what it is replying to, but nearly completely undetectable by a quick scan of your talkpage. Double sharp (talk) 14:54, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
    • (in response to Peridon's comment there) "...it took several hours before I noticed it first." Is that good? If it were an OBOD, how many seconds would it take for you to notice? (I'm guessing less than one.) Double sharp (talk) 14:53, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh no!

I think the Orange Bar Of Doom is really iconic - for Wikipedia editors, not for readers. Adapt it, modify ... yes, but don't just get rid of it. On german Wikipedia the OBOD is colloquially/affectionately called Kackbalken (~ "shit bar") and i don't think people would be happy to see it taken away without good reason. It's useful and it's part of the folklore of Wikipedia. --Atlasowa (talk) 20:04, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Damn, just saw the new design compromise (F2):

I think this is OK, it keeps the fundamental design, is recognizable, etc --Atlasowa (talk) 20:25, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

I find the miniature orange bar as less than useless. It is not very noticeable, and it replaces one of the links, making it harder to find. Apteva (talk) 23:00, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Yuck. Can we please not replace links? It's bad enough not to have the (last change) already. Now another anchor – which is with the others (which work) – is lost. Double sharp (talk) 11:11, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

• Let icons and folklore be consigned to the historic place where they belong. Lament it some, like the li'l poem above, then move over and move on. -- Ohconfucius ^{ping / poke} 09:16, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

• You seem to not like the OBOD. That's all right; I do. But I would dispute calling it an icon and folklore. Perhaps it is iconic and part of our folklore, but the main point is that it serves its purpose well. IMHO (and of many others who have commented on), the red square does not, while this does. Despite your dislike for it, I trust you have never missed a new message notification with the OBOD, have you? I'm guessing no one has. And yet, people succeed in missing the red square. To my mind, that is clear proof of the OBOD's superiority. It's fine if you don't see it that way; that's why we're not arguing for the removal of the new feature, but an option to retain the old one. Double sharp (talk) 11:11, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

• I was just responding to those who commented that the Orange bar was an 'icon' and 'folklore'. Do a word search on the yards of text above. ;-) Not only have I not missed a Notifications message, I only today accused another editor of reverting me twice – I had seen double because of how Notifications works. I do grant that there will always be those who will wilfully ignore any message notification, and the Orange Bar doesn't lend too much of an excuse, but in my view, this excuse is transparently easy to see through even under Notifications. -- Ohc ^{digame / ¿que pasa?} 09:15, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Explaining to returning users

Returning to a point I made further up: active users who edit every day are by now familiar with these changes, but there are a very large number of occasional users who over the next weeks and months will return to find the orange bar gone and the new system in place. You can expect a steady stream of WTF??? comments, unless something is done to explain to them.

I suggest that for any substantial user-interface change, starting with this one, a conspicuous dismissable banner should be displayed, saying "We have made this change: click here for an explanation and here for a FAQ. Check this box if you do not want to be shown this notice again."

That may be slightly irritating this time for the people already familiar with the change, but I think most will understand that it is necessary for the much larger number of users who don't yet know about it. JohnCD (talk) 22:15, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Or, now that we have Echo, it could be a notification rather than a banner? — HHHIPPO 22:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

But the point is that returning users, unaware of the fairly unobtrusive new notification marker, may well not notice it. The idea is that they need a one-time, more conspicuous, notice to tell them about it. JohnCD (talk) 08:47, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

No, they don't. In the world of new media, nothing remains static. I think it's rather patronising to think they won't realise that something has changed after a few hours have elapsed. -- Ohconfucius ^{ping / poke} 09:11, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

I was also more thinking of future announcements. A lot of what's done with sitenotices and watchlist-notices now could move to Echo. — HHHIPPO 09:30, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

No, they'll probably see no OBOD, think they have no new messages, merrily work along, and realise some hours or days later that something is amiss when they click on a direct link to their talk page. Then they will be confused, file lots of help requests, and probably take ages to notice the tiny little red square. Double sharp (talk) 11:06, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't think we really need to speculate about this: either it will happen, or it won't, and we will find out then. We don't actually need to address this particular issue unless and until it happens. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:22, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Linking a User Without Notifications

@Joy, Hans Adler, INeverCry, Peridon, and Anomie:

I've started {{noping}} which can link a user without notifying them.

It works, but the colouring scheme is for external links (as that is how it gets around notifying.) If anyone can work out how to fix this, it'd be appreciated.

930913(Congratulate) 22:56, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Sweet, now anybody who wants to see who's being talked about "in private" can just check the transclusions for this template. </cynic> — Scott • talk 12:40, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

This is going to be a can of worms. The whole point of Echo is that users will know when and where they are being "mentioned". Circumventing this defeats the entire purpose of open communication. Why would anyone want to hide the fact they mention a user? — Edokter (talk) — 12:53, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Err, hi? Not sure why I was "pinged" here, but I agree with Scott Martin and Edokter. Also, this seems like quite a kludge. Anomie⚔ 16:51, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

SPI is an example of an occassion where you might not want to mention someone. Or maybe CCI in some cases if you want to catch them in the act before they lay low for a while. Kumioko (talk) 17:45, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

So just don't link to their user name, surely? — Scott • talk 13:41, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Link to their talk page. It's generally a more useful link anyway. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:43, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

• I'd note we're talking about a blacklist for bots, and the potential blacklisting of pages (SPI was the crucial example) has been mentioned as well. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 19:48, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

No notification - bug?

Hi, I blanked my entire watchlist some days ago, including my user page. Whilst changing the image on my user page today saw that a message had been left there, but there was no notification - no red dot, no yellow stick, and unfortunately even Writkeeper's script didn't work. Is this possibly a bug? In other words, if a user's page isn't on their watch, then they don't receive a notification? If so, that's problematic for new users who don't know to put their own pages on watch. Truthkeeper (talk) 20:47, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

No, there should definitely be a notification. Was the message recent, or...? Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 20:54, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I introduced a bug in my script recently that could've caused it, for mine at least. I only just today noticed and fixed it. Not sure about the slew of other notifications. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:56, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Yep, the message was today. But no notification, no red dot, no yellow stick. My page was automatically placed back on watch when I edited it, and I got a notification for the next message, with red dot and yellow stick. The first message could have sat there forever ... Truthkeeper (talk) 20:59, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

You keep saying "user page". Do you actually mean that, or do you mean your talk page? That would make a difference, I imagine. Ignatzmice•talk 03:02, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Orange notifications bar now integrated

See Kaldari's message here. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 20:52, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I love it

In contrast to my apathy above, after using it for a few days and getting notified about various things I really, really like how notifications works. Thanks! And kudos especially to @Kaldari: for hacking up the {{ping|user}} template -- genius. -- phoebe / (talk to me) 03:23, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I think this is very much the sort of feature where its usefulness is going to become more apparent over time - the breakthrough here is not 'having a revert notification' or 'having user mentions'. It's having the skeletal framework that can handle reverts, or user mentions, or a whole host of other things. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 06:12, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

+1 – This seems to me to be a functional improvement over the old orange bar; thank you. As for the general mood of this discussion and the RfC specifically: of course people who don't like it will be more vocal than those who do. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:33, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm seeing a lot of positive comments like this on different pages. I think it just takes people a while to get used to change, and then they see the substantial upside (like being able to notify a person merely by linking his name, rather than making a trip to a separate page and leaving a special message about it). WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:12, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

+1 to the comments, the framework is truly awesome and solves a lot of problems that a big watchlist can't really handle, Sadads (talk) 15:30, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Unwanted notifications

Why do I get a notification for each newsletter delivery by ENewsBot rather than just the notification that I have received the newsletter. I am not interested in everyone else on the distribution getting a delivery. May be this should be directed to the bot owner bet will see what I get here first. Keith D (talk) 11:52, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

That's because you're mentioned (and linked) in the newsletter. Another reason for a blacklist or 'hide bot edits' option. — HHHIPPO 12:54, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Or is it perhaps because Keith D created the the page and is being notified when a new link is made to that page? I agree that a blacklist or hide bots option might be nice for these types of edits. If the notifications are for page links rather than user name mentions, then perhaps you could use a second account for creating these pages for which you don't want to receive notifications. If the notifications are for user name mentions, then might it be possible to somehow "disguise" the user name or perhaps wrap it in a template or special type of link so it doesn't trigger the notifications. older ≠ wiser 16:25, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

• I'd speak to the bot owner about delinking recipients. Mentions for page links are actually disabled by default, not enabled; I agree, Hhhippo, that a blacklist is important. That's why we're working on one ;). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 18:09, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I know. I didn't mean to complain. But then that's not so common these days ;-) — HHHIPPO 18:23, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Btw: I'm not sure what you mean by delinking recipients, Keith is linked as the author. — HHHIPPO 18:26, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

What is the way forward then? It is not for the BOT operator to do anything. It has to be the notification system to provide a way to selectively ignore mentions and/or to have some ignore BOT preferences implemented. Keith D (talk) 12:11, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

@User:Keith D, I'm still not quite clear what type of notification this is. Is it a page link notification (because you created the page) or is it a mention notification (because you are mentioned on the page and the page is then being transcluded onto user talk pages). User:Jza84 is also linked to on that page (Wikipedia:WikiProject Yorkshire/Newsletter/May 2013). Do you know it they also received notifications? If yes, then the mention notifications are because of the transclusion, in which case, in the short term you could try unlinking your user name on the page -- or perhaps using a redirect to link to your user name. I believe I saw elsewhere on the page that notifications are not triggered by redirects. In the long term, dev might want to consider whether transcluded pages like this should trigger notifications. older ≠ wiser 17:21, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

If it is because of the page is

@Keith D: they are working on blacklist/no bot features, be patient. What can be done until that's done is indeed avoiding a direct link to your user page in the newsletter (if another issue should be distributed before the new features are deployed).

@Bkonrad: it seems to me the newsletter is subst'ed, not transcluded, but I think the effect is the same. — HHHIPPO 19:04, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Egads, you're right, it is substituted. That seems rather inefficient. I just assumed it worked similar to how the Signpost is delivered. older ≠ wiser 19:11, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

I have ask User:Jza84 if he received any notifications for the delivery. Keith D (talk) 19:32, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

He has indicated that he got notifications as well. Keith D (talk) 23:55, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Feature request

Is it possible to customize which pages Echo pings for? For example, I have two sub-user talk pages that I also use for communication. I wonder if it was possible that Echo gave me a notification similar to the one for my talk page every tie that page was edited? It could be a nice feature to have. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 12:46, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Not really; that specific situation is rather an edge case, I'm afraid :/. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 20:58, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Are RFC's still taken seriously

Original subheading was: "Are RFC's still taking seriously or are "votes" against the "establishment" just seen as hot air? [in which case we can dismantle any such proceedings since editors don't have a say anyways]

We have an RFC with a huge majority [Any elected US President has yet to see such numbers] and yet, those "votes" are ignored. We could take this as a precedence for any future or momentarily running RFCs b/c they ain't worth shit according to and in reference to this one held here. Is that really the course Wiki wants to follow from now on? It certainly looks like it.TMCk (talk) 02:09, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

IMO RFC's are pretty much a waste of time these days. Kumioko (talk) 02:22, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

I must say that they did take notice that there was unrest amongst the non-technical plebs (us...). Where it got us was a 'compromise' largely favouring those who hated the orange banner and didn't want to see it again. This was despite those of us calling for retention stating clearly that we wanted it to be switchable. What we've ended up with isn't in your face enough for newbies, and I feel that, like me, quite a lot will just turn it off anyway now we're used to the pimple. I quite like the pimple now, but took time to notice it and work it out when it first grew. I can see little value in the animated orange. I still think we need something that's well out of the background wording. It's better than a blue one, at least. But I am rather disgusted with the way it's been handled. And with the 'talking to the plebs' attitude that has come from the 'management' and their supporters. Too much 'ooh isn't this marvellous!!!' and 'wakey wakey campers!'. I would suggest that rather than dismantle RfCs, we should encourage participation. Boycotting an election never works. You might be ignored by the junta, but at least you've tried. And the use of IRC for anything in the way of assessing opinion should be right out. Keep it in the open where all can take part. OK, the tech people can use it to sort out who is doing what, but there should be no use for deciding what is to be done. Peridon (talk) 08:25, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Me too, its seemed to me that the developers viewed the bar as an old and low tech way of doing something that could be done with new flashy java code and took action. The problem as I see it is this, most of the developers don't edit much but they are forcing a change upon those of us that do because they have the power to do so and we can't do anything except keepo editing and accept it or leave. As I mentioned above a few times I don't like it but I also don't think the developers are going to undo the change either. Kumioko (talk) 15:02, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Everything can be done with high tech; whether or not it then fulfills its original purpose is a different question.

We have consensus already. If they don't undo the change, they're not respecting consensus. While they certainly can do that (and I think they intend to), as we can't change it while they can, 136 vs 36 is certainly a strong majority... Double sharp (talk) 04:04, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Have hope! Be not so resigned to the death of the OBOD! At the very least, post statistics about how many people use Writ Keeper's script ;-) Even if our voices are ignored, at least they will be preserved in discussion. Double sharp (talk) 15:21, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Is not it against Wikipedia:Consensus? --Tito Dutta (contact) 16:01, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

(ec) I'm thinking of asking new editors (not those I've already blocked...) to reply to me. I want to know if they're getting messages with the new thing. That's my main concern. And the concern of a lot of others who are sort of front line workers here. Writ Keeper's gadget is fine for those who hear about it - the already experienced editors - who prefer or need a clearer notification of messages. IPs still get the OBOD, apparently. I'll try that out next week when I'll be on varying IPs myself. (Only ever edited as an IP once - by mistake.) Peridon (talk) 16:03, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

I would also add and for those that weren't around then, that there is a reason the OBOD is Orange and not red like the new discussion messages are. Its because a lot of people have trouble seeing Red, so orange is a better color and using red on a site like this pretty much violates every rule of Webdesign. Kumioko (talk) 16:15, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Also, it could be harder to see the blue wikilink against red (well, for me anyway), especially a dark red like the one in the notifications. Double sharp (talk) 16:41, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

A lot of lala here in the responses but not much about how much RFC's make a [no] difference as it's been ignored by those who couldn't care less about what the community wants. The system's broken and in comparison, our outdated election system [US] is a mess but still far ahead of what we call Wiki "consensus". Of course no "rant", valid or not will make a difference as the real rules are set in stone off wiki. Happy crapping, TMCk (talk) 23:15, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

We will judge by the next change. I think it equally possible the relevant people have understood, or that they have not. I'm a little reluctant to press this issue in case they have understood, but if they do something like this next time around, I'm aware of a number of probably effective strategies that have been devised by the more cynical among us. DGG ( talk ) 05:53, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Note: I've again trimmed the sub-heading, which was ridiculously long. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:12, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

I've done so again; and I've restored the above comment, which was unacceptably and inexplicably deleted. Removing others' comments can lead to editing blocks. Note that the original subheading can be seen, below the shortened subheading. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:54, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

About "Consensus": Read the WP:CONEXCEPT section. The editorial community controls the contents of the encyclopedia. The dev community controls the website and its software. They don't tell us how to achieve neutrality; we don't tell them how to keep the website running. We can request features and changes, and we can tell them what we think about their software—just like they can tell us what they think about our articles—but we're not in control of the software. If they have any sense at all, they will discount the "Waah, it's change!" comments anyway. Speaking of which, there are some decent sources available if anyone wants to write a section at Web design on user reaction to upgrades. AFAICT the basic take-home message is that everyone pitches a fit for a couple of weeks, especially if nothing was obviously broken about the old system, and then usually decides that the devs were pretty much right and that the new one is better overall. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:18, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't really think we & the WMF want to get into a direct confrontation on this--it will not have a helpful overall result, whatever the decision. What we needs is ways of reaching agreement on the interface, or at least finding ways to deal with the disagreements For the parts of the interface that primarily affect the users, I think we as editors have no special qualifications. What we have is really pretty primitive, and I think the WMF are on the right track in trying to modernize it. I especially like the realization that we need different displays for different platforms, Getting this right requires not intuition, or opinion, but formal testing, and I think they have the qualifications and the facilities for this. some of us volunteers know a good deal about this also, and could contribute, but they are in the best position to deal with it.

For theeditingi nterface, this is something else. It would seem that we know what we use and we ought to know what we need better than they do, but this needs to be qualified. We don'ty necessarily know what improvements are possible or feasible, and how to go about finding them. We tend to be focussed on our own needs for what we do, and they are not the same for someone who predominantly copyedits as someone who write articles or someone who deals with problem users. We tend to have our own working patterns and workarounds that have hardened in time, and we do tend to be rather stick-in=the-mud about them. But those from outsdide our part of the community , though they may see the problems, don't really know what they will affect. There can really be no way to find out, except by trying--our system has arrived at its present state helter-skelter without overall planning, and there are many non-0obvious dependencies on the work flow. Frankly, we editors need help in getting improvements made, and the professional staff are in a good position to give it--if they would only realize that not all of their ideas will work, that we need to see alternate versions, and that WP is so complex that we are all very much afraid that something will happen that will prove to be harmful, but that ewe didn't see coming. This is a situation where we're in effect the customers, and we must in the end be satisfied, but it is they who must do the work to satisfy us. I think we do & should have a practical veto here, even though it be informal--I hope we will never be in a situation where we must find a formal way to use it. DGG ( talk ) 05:23, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Mention didn't generate a notification

Is there any reason why this edit didn't give me a notification? A similar edit to the same page a few days ago did give me a notification. - Evad37 (talk) 12:27, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

The notification is only sent if it thinks someone is trying to make a 'talk' post. If he is just editing, or moving or other things that potentially might not be notification worthy, it won't sent a notif. The user posting it accidentally signed only with his name, and not with name+date. The latter is required in order to determine that a user was making a 'talk' post. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 17:38, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, it requires a full signature. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 18:10, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Does this apply to user talk pages? If so, that's another retrograde step from the old orange bar then. If someone frigs with my talk page, I want to know about it. If I add a another sentence to an earlier post on another's talk page, I want them to know about it. What if the talk page is later signed by a third party, using {{unsigned}}? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:22, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Not in the slightest. Talkpage notifications are unrelated to mention notifications; he's talking about a mention notification. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 18:51, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Pseudo OBOD Gadget is live

I have taken the comments on this page as overwhelming community consensus for a return to OBOD for the time being and have consequently implemented User:Writ Keeper's script as a gadget. If you wish to complain about this action, my talk page is here. If you want the gadget modified, I will be no use, you need Writ Keeper for that. Regards, SpinningSpark 18:50, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, I wouldn't have enabled it by default if I knew how to put it in there, but I suppose that's ok for now. Can we edit the orange bar message to tell people about the changeover to Notifications so that when the WMF gets Echo's next release done, we can turn off the default Gadget without people wondering where it went? MBisanz ^talk 18:59, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

The on-by-default is needed for newbies. See MediaWiki talk:Gadget-OBoD.js—if you add that in, there will be a link to the documentation page. You can see how it will look at User:Ignatzmice/sandbox. Ignatzmice•talk 19:01, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

On behalf of the CSD area admins and all others who deal with newcomers, thanks. It gave me quite a shock... Peridon (talk) 19:08, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but enabling a gadget by default requires a broad consensus. This should at least be discussed at the Villaga Pump. I have disabled the [default] keyword. — Edokter (talk) — 19:20, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

The 107/19 RFC above isn't sufficient or isn't in the right place? MBisanz ^talk 19:25, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

(ec)There's a pretty broad consensus here on this page. There is no point having it if it is not on by default. Those who just want it for personal reasons can add it their js page. This is for newbies who don't know their arse from their elbow as far as how WP works is concerned. SpinningSpark 19:27, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

We're in the process of adding a link to instructions for turning it off. It needs to be default-on for the newbies. Ignatzmice•talk 19:32, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

The RFC should have been advertised to the Village Pump then. My main concern is that untested code has been made to run by default; that has crippled the site in the past. The code should be reviewed before being made default; that is policy. — Edokter (talk) — 19:34, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

With all due respect Edokter it didn't require a broad consensus to get rid of the old bar and go to an invisible and unreadable number. Why would it require a broad consensus (that everyone knows is impossible to achive in Wikipedia anyway) to bring it back. Kumioko (talk) 16:49, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

I have posted at VPP pointing here. The script was already being run by several users without problems so I was confident that there was nothing seriously wrong with it. It is also an urgent problem that new users are not being warned properly of mistakes they are making and getting blocked as a consequence. SpinningSpark 19:37, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Also posted at VPT, section #Orange message bar. Review the script for yourself, Edokter. Ignatzmice•talk 19:54, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Also see User talk:Writ Keeper/Archives/7#New script request—there were some issues, but he's fixed them. It's not exactly "untested." Ignatzmice•talk 19:56, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I would review it, but JSON is not my speciality. — Edokter (talk) — 20:00, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Edokter, who are the "resident javascript gurus" whose review would satisfy you? We need to find one quickly. JohnCD (talk) 21:27, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Shouldn't this be in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo? FallingGravity (talk) 21:40, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

• Do you know how to get it there? As Rd232 said below, this is a slap-it-on fix because the WMF team can't be arsed to do it themselves. And in the end, I expect we'll keep the gadget but undo the default-on (once we re-do the default-on). Ignatzmice•talk 21:49, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

On by default?

Should the orange talk page notification bar gadget be turned on by default for all users (users will be free to choose to turn it off individually)?

• Not without review from a resident javascript guru. — Edokter (talk) — 20:01, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
• YES, per above. The script works, it is fully opt-out-able. We need it to let new users know they even have a talk page. Ignatzmice•talk Today, 15:58 (UTC−4)
• Yes! It can be hard enough to get new editors to start communicating and not being sure they actually saw the message, doesn't help. span style="font-size:small;">talk talk 20:12, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
• Edokter's concerns about insufficiently tested code make me nervous about widespread use at this time. As for the near future, before changing the default, I'd kind of like to know whether it actually matters. I know that change is bad (and this is yet another reminder that the WP:VisualEditor will totally change editing in just two months), but are we actually having a higher percentage of newbies claim that they didn't see it, or is the problem simply with us old fossils? WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:25, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Yes, people are reporting problems with newbies. See the #Yes section above, though I believe people mentioned it in other places too. Ignatzmice•talk 20:38, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Newbies generally won't complain that they didn't see messages: they won't know they had any, they will find that their contribution has been deleted, not know why, and go away discouraged. This is a new-editor-retention issue if ever there was one. JohnCD (talk) 21:06, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
    • Either that, or they'll find out that their contributions were deleted via a large orange bar, read the templated message on their talk page, and go away discouraged. Actual discussion is probably our best choice when dealing with good-faith newbies and editor retention. Just my thoughts. FallingGravity (talk) 21:21, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
      • The templated message explains the reasons, and gives them a link to the talk page of the person who sent it. There's no way to even start a discussion if the newbie doesn't know there is a message for him. JohnCD (talk) 21:37, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Pdnbtn.png

• • • • I know, I use templates all the time when dealing with vandals. What I'm saying is is that neither the presence of an orange bar or an Echo fly-out are excuses to bite the newcomers, whether it be templated or non-templated discussions. (Note: I'm not accusing you of anything, but I think it's a good message for these kind of newbie-awareness threads). FallingGravity (talk) 22:03, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
• Yes to on by default. The people that know what's what will turn it off if they want. The ones we want to target will find out about talk pages. Or get blocked and find out that way. Take your pick. Peridon (talk) 20:50, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
• Yes, absolutely, otherwise it will not be available to new users, the people who need it most. The "official" solution seems to be receding - Fabrice's message below talks of a release the week after next. We cannot possibly wait that long without an effective way to communicate with newbies. JohnCD (talk) 20:58, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
• Yes. Since WMF refuses to temporarily roll back whilst the relevant parts of Echo are brought up to scratch, we'll just have to do it ourselves. To be clear: for me this is absolutely temporary, until Echo does what it should have done in the first place, which is make everyone go "wow, that's so much better than the Orange Bar!". (Or if that seems to set the standard too high... then at least "yeah, OK, that's no worse.") Rd232 ^talk 21:32, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
• No. As a user I find the OBOD ugly and obnoxious. For those with concerns about visibility for new users: you have absolutely no proof that your concerns are valid. Only data about clickthrough rates on both features, tested as a controlled experiment, would give us an objective understanding of whether the new system is better or worse for showing newbies they have messages. I find it ironic that people complaining about the WMF forcing features on users would jump to forcing the OBOD on all newly-registered editors. There are also performance concerns, and the code needs review from a seasoned JavaScript programmer if it's going to be on for everyone, like Edokter points out. Steven Walling • talk 21:54, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
  • In the event that the gadget is re-defaulted, a message would be added that would include, among other things, a link to the documentation page that has clear instructions for how to disable it. (See what this would look like at User:Ignatzmice/sandbox. It would be the third version, probably.) We need it default-on to make sure the new users know they have messages; unlike what the WMF did, we're providing a very easy way to undo this if people don't like it. Ignatzmice•talk 21:58, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
    • I don't see why people who just want the old way back because they're grumpy and unwilling to change should be able to inflict this ugly thing on everyone else by default. It's an easy way for advanced users like you and I to turn it off, but I don't see why I should need to in the first place, just because a minority of active editors prefer the old system. The way that the preference is described right now is childish and opaque to most people, and that section of Appearance preferences is insanely cluttered with cruft already. What's more, a largely untested JavaScript-dependent version of the OBOD is not a performant way to introduce a better way of pointing out notifications. As Fabrice says below, the WMF is working on a bunch of ways to potentially address the concern of visibility, and they won't involve a total hack like this. Steven Walling • talk 22:11, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
      • If you think the doc page is "childish", edit it! That's the point of a wiki. We need something NOW to let the newbies know what's up; Fabiance says below that an update is coming out week after next. Eloquence says he's "suggesting the team" do something sooner. I have little faith in that. Following a link to a page that details how to turn it off is hardly "advanced user" material. Ignatzmice•talk 22:41, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
      • (edit conflict) It's absolutely not a case of people being "grumpy and unwilling to change": it is a real problem of how to communicate with new users. Andy Mabbett reports above (#76 in the "Yes" section of the RFC above) that he sent a test message to a class of newbies he was training, and in four hours NOT ONE of them noticed the notification. If ever there was an "editor engagement" issue this is one. A newbie will very frequently start by doing something wrong: if he just finds his contribution reverted with no explanation, he will probably go away discouraged. We need to send a welcome message, and an explanation of the problem, and a link to someone who can discuss it. It is intensely frustrating to do that in the knowledge that the recipient will probably never know he has a message. Fabrice's note below talks of a possible official solution the week after next: we cannot wait that long. If Erik has decreed that we cannot have the orange bar back as an interim, we shall have to do this DIY solution. JohnCD (talk) Today, 18:39 (UTC−4)
        • Andy's quote above is totally biased. When we get 3-4,000 new editors registering every day, drawing a conclusion about all new editor reactions to Echo from a sample of four people is pretty ridiculous. No one yet has any real idea whether the feature is more or less successful than the OBOD for new editors who have never seen either feature. Steven Walling • talk 23:14, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
          • Steven, I'd be grateful if you could explain your grounds for alleging that my report is "totally biased". Can you also say who has drawn a conclusion about all new editor reactions based on it? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:55, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
            • Andy: I explained more below. Note I'm not saying you're personally biased. I'm saying a sample of four people from an editathon, when we have thousands of new signups ever day, is too small a sample. You can't draw any conclusions about the wider new editor population from observing four people, especially not when these are the type of new editors who sought out extra hand-holding in order to learn the ropes (which is one known bias, among other unknowns like their demographics). The only thing that will tell us with any confidence about whether OBOD is more or less usable for new editors overall is an experiment with a wider, randomized sample. People here on this page are in fact calling for interface changes, like turning on an OBOD gadget by default for all users, based on the claim that the new notifications aren't visible to inexperienced editors. They said it all over the AN thread too. Steven Walling • talk 18:21, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
              • Steven: If I thought you'd said I was biased, I would have referred that in my question to you. I asked you why you said that my report was totally biased, and you have not explained that. Please do so now. The sample was indeed small, but was sufficient to initially identify an issue, per Usability testing#How many users to test?; and was confirmed by the second sample tested yesterday. I'm unclear why you think a failure to notify people "who sought out extra hand-holding in order to learn the ropes" (leaving aside that that's your unfounded assumption) is not a case for an urgent remedy. I don't dispute that "people are calling for interface changes", here or elsewhere; but I asked who has drawn a conclusion about all new editor reactions". The use of "all" was yours. You haven't answered that, either. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:32, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
                • If you don't understand why hastily changing the interface for tens of thousands of people based on a usability test with four people is wrong, I don't think it's worth trying to convince you otherwise. Steven Walling • talk 18:46, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
                  • Then kindly explain why WMF shouldn't fire the entire editor engagement team, because they've hastily changed the interface for millions of people? You have the gall to object when we're trying to fix the mess that you've made, and you continue to thumb your nose at almost everyone else's wishes. It's you who has the explaining and the convincing to do. Nyttend (talk) 19:09, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

                    Excellent point. How big was WMF's sample size for general usability tests of this feature and removal of the established one in each of the four key groups IP users / new accounts / experienced editors / editors using screen readers? As a general comment, Steven Walling, when you manage to make me agree with Andy Mabbett on something, that should be reason for serious concern. Hans Adler 19:21, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

                    Right, exactly. You keep saying "only four! not big enough!" but then you don't have your own numbers to throw back at us—numbers you should have gotten before deploying Echo removing the orange bar. (Again: Echo, good; orange bar, also good.) Ignatzmice•talk 19:26, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

                  • I don't appreciate the passive-aggressive tone of your response; but where did I call for "hastily changing the interface for tens of thousands of people based on a usability test with four people"? You have again not answered the questions I put to you; and have ignored the point I made about usability testing. All this reflects very badly on the WMF team of which you are part. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:55, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
                    • I note that Steven has offered no answers to my questions; and no justification for his assertion that I called for "hastily changing the interface for tens of thousands of people based on a usability test with four people". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:19, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

@Nyttend: I'm sorry, but I fundamentally disagree that this is a "mess" that needs hasty cleanup by throwing a JavaScript gadget at all users by default. (Also, note I'm not on notifications team, so "mess you've made" doesn't really apply to me, and is why I'm using my volunteer account to participate in this RFC.) If people who dislike the new feature and want OBOD back want to hack something together for their use, go for it, but neither WMF nor the community should change the interface for everybody else based on an untested assumption about how new editors react to a feature. Fabrice, Erik, and others have said that there is a plan to properly A/B test the feature, which will give us a basis for a more rational discussion about how drastically we need to change the interface. Until that happens, I'm against turning on this gadget by default. Steven Walling • talk 19:40, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

• Why should we care what you think, when you don't care about our preferences? And what do you call something that made it impossible to notify IPs and a lot harder to notify everyone else? Since you're participating in this as an editor as well as a Foundation person, let me remind you directly: consensus governs what we do as editors, and editors who keep thumbing their noses at others are routinely and justifiably blocked. Nyttend (talk) 19:47, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

• All right, calm down, everyone. I think most people would call 120/23 (with three of the 23 supporting a temporary orange bar) clear consensus. No need to start threatening blocks; the important thing is figuring out the best way to get it back (temporarily!) until the WMF team steps up to the plate. Ignatzmice•talk 19:53, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

• Nyttend, quit with the threats. You're going to block me for commenting on an open RFC, and then defending my position after people replied? Sorry, but you know that wouldn't fly. You don't have to care what I think, but I still have a right to comment as a fellow editor and administrator. Steven Walling • talk 20:17, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

• For the record, while I don't think there are any bugs in my code, and I do perform substantial testing of my scripts on my own before I publish them, I think the deployment of my script was over-hasty, especially since I haven't heard back from one user who has reported problems (though I'm reasonably sure I fixed them); I had not been asked for a final go-ahead. My last communication that I recall about this was with MBisanz on IRC some time ago (around 6 AM this morning UTC, I believe), where I said that the code might be ready for such a deployment, but that I wanted to hear back from Nyttend first, and that I would like to have seen an explicit consensus to adopt the script first. I'm not sure whether I support or oppose on-by-default in any case. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 22:06, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I apologize for being so hasty about it, but we really need to make sure newbies are seeing that they have new messages. As far as I can see, the "bug" Nyttend reported was that it did nothing at all—hardly breaking the site (I know you didn't say that). I mean, say someone comes along with Windows 98; what's the worst-case scenario? I think the benefits far outweigh any potential bugs. Ignatzmice•talk 23:04, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
• On - as a new editor it was one the few things that probably kept me here, having the in-your-face-you-can't-ignore message bar light up was a delight and something I looked forward to because it meant that someone noticed a question I'd asked. Had I been welcomed, it would have been even more exciting. As an established editor it's equally exciting to have someone drop by to chat, to say hi, even to tell you how awful you are. It's how we communicate and stay engaged. Truthkeeper (talk) 22:49, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
• Off/oppose I have performed no tests and honestly have no idea how this script in its current form will interact with anonymous editors. One of the things I wanted to do before this was deployed was to make a quick return for anons. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 22:53, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
  • IPs get the normal system orange bar, see #IP notifications above. I don't think people who aren't logged in get Gadgets anyway—they certainly don't get preferences. Ignatzmice•talk 23:01, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
    • Actually, from my understanding of gadgets, and I did quite a bit of research to implement it on a non-wikipedia wiki, is that the point of setting them on by default is non-logged in users do get them that way (it's the only way they can). Technical 13 (talk) 23:18, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
      • True, default-on gadgets are executed for anon editors. But this is moot, as is pointed out, anon editors still get the orange bar. — Edokter (talk) — 23:28, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
        • This is not moot. If/when the gadget is re-installed and re-defaulted, IP editors will see two orange bars. Although I thought I saw someone say the regular orange bar only lasted for one page? Ignatzmice•talk 01:37, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
        • Actually, I see now that WP:Gadget says [default|rights=minoredit] will enable it for all registered users, so that's what we want if this ever ends up being reinstated. Ignatzmice•talk 23:06, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
          • The proposed OBOD is not going to happen; Writ Keeper does not want his code used and the WMF also has reservations. The current gadget (red notify popup) may be an alternative temporary option to turn on by default, which is a little broader in scope (as it shows on all notifications, which I think is not a bad thing). If the community so wishes, I have no problem turning the current gadget on by default until a permanent solution is implemented. — Edokter (talk) — 23:19, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

• Comment: I think the testing should be done expeditiously and turned back on by default. Those that think it is ugly, DO have the option of going and turning it off in their preferences. More importantly, if it is not on by default, how will the new users know it is available and you are effectively taking away their choice to turn it off. That being said, I'm maintaining this is a comment and not an on because I would like to see the testing done first (and quickly). Technical 13 (talk) 23:18, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
• Yes per RD232. (As a temporary solution until a good Echo-based solution can be phased in.) Every day that goes by, I'm astonished that this straightforward step has not been taken. Stop disrupting the collaborative norms of a top 5 site; create a rollout plan for an almost certainly improved notification system that phases out the old one in a manageable way, with plenty of opportunity for zapping bugs and accommodating unanticipated use cases. In addition to the concerns about IPs and newbies, every day that goes by where somebody like User:INeverCry is impeded from working at his normal capacity is damaging the project. -Pete (talk) 02:05, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
  • @Peteforsyth: I'm sorry, but "disrupting the collaborative norms of a top 5 site" is nonsensical hyperbole. With the new feature, you get the exact same user talk page notification you would get with the previous version, plus you get more detail about exactly who edited when, and other kinds of notifications. These notifications about user talk messages still facilitate the exact same collaborative interactions, plus more with mentions and revert notifications. This feature is enhancing collaboration, if anything. The thing that people are complaining about legitimately is primarily one aspect of this feature: that the indicator for having new notifications is not as prominent as it was before. That's a pretty specific piece of feedback that can be dealt with from a design perspective, and it will be. But to say that this one problematic aspect is "disrupting collaborative norms" is over the top. As other editors around have said quite correctly: there are some great things and some bad things about the new system. Frankly, I would expect that you -- one of the architects of the Public Policy Initiative and someone who does paid consulting about Wikipedia -- would have more empathy towards others introducing potentially controversial new ideas. Steven Walling • talk 05:39, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
    • there are some great things and some bad things about the new system. - to be precise, there are some good new (but under-developed) things and one very bad thing about the new system, and refusing to deactivate the bad thing until its brought up to scratch undermines the entire system. The general "no turning back, not even temporarily" attitude also has a potential demoralising effect on volunteers which nobody seems to given a moment's thought to. Frankly, the collective behaviour of the Editor Engagement Team here is bizarre - changing a key means of communicating with new editors in a way that is probably significantly worse, whilst ignoring feedback from many highly active editors about this issue! And the only real response is to say things like "well we don't know if the key feature's really objectively worse, and a few people really disliked it"; "overall it's a great new system"; "we'll fix it fairly soon, we're working on it, but in the mean time, you're stuck with it". Frankly, if I was a CEO of a company where something like this had happened, I'd be looking to fire someone. Rd232 ^talk 09:53, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

• I do not think "disrupting the collaborative norms of a top 5 site" is nonsensical hyperbole at all, it is a very fair description. Communicating with new users is vital to engaging them with the project: for a team called "Editor Engagement" to turn off the most effective way of doing that, and refuse to reinstate it while an adequate substitute is worked out, really makes one wonder if they are on the same planet. Nor has any step been taken to warn returning occasional users, accustomed to the orange bar as a message notifier, that it has gone.

If the new ED wants to understand why the WMF has a reputation with the projects for not listening, and for dismissing any opinion or evidence that does not agree with their preconceptions, s/he could do worse than read down this page. A 116/22 majority in an RFC is "a minority of active editors"; a small grey/red blob replacing a large bright orange bar is "the exact same user talk page notification you would get with the previous version"; the idea that it might be less likely to be noticed by newbies is "an assumption"; and Andy Mabbett's actual evidence of that is dismissed as "totally biased". How on earth can you justify that last remark? JohnCD (talk) 11:46, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

@JohnCD: last month there were more than 30,000 people who contributed five or more edits to English Wikipedia.[3] You don't have to know much about statistics to grok that asking just four new editors is not enough of a sample to be reliably representative. It is potentially subject to a lot of inherent bias, especially due to the fact that they were the kind of people who sought out hands-on training, and were thus less likely to be able to understand all parts of our interface. Steven Walling • talk 17:12, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

We shall have to agree to differ. It seems to me that when the question is whether the new notification system is as effective as the old one, a report which says "none of my class noticed the new notification in four hours; in previous classes, people have noticed the orange bar immediately" is highly relevant and cannot be dismissed as biased or a small sample. JohnCD (talk) 20:36, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

@Steven Walling: I think you might be missing the point here. While four editors may not make a representative sample, they cannot be ignored from being a part of a "sample" either. Are there studies or anecdotes which show that the red blob works better than OBoD? If not, I doubt anyone has the right to rebutt a correct but possibly non-representative example from John. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 09:55, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, on by default. Nobody should be able to go without the Orange Bar unless they go into their own preferences and shut it off by their own choice. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:15, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
• Not yet, but soon. It's a very bad idea to make a script default when the writer says it's not yet ready to be default. However, once it's ready, it absolutely needs to be default: as JohnCD says, we need to be sure that new people are reading their messages. As Rd232 says, this is the kind of thing for which people are justifiably fired. Nyttend (talk) 18:43, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
• Yes On by default. It's not as if it's untested.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:49, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
• No - I oppose enabling non-existent gadget, especially by default. FallingGravity (talk) 10:46, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

• NO. The gadget, and the redesigned one mentioned below, are basically a kneejerk hack to put back a change that the WMF chose to remove, because some people really want the Orange Bar not necessarily for their own, but really as warnings to intimidate and frighten others. I think it comes from an irrational underlying fear of being ignored. Those who are dead set on vandalising articles on the site are not likely to pay heed to notifications, even if they are bright red in size 46 font and flashing. Now that it's been replaced, any gadget that seeks to do similar things but in a much LOUDER manner is redundant. It makes little sense to keep it except as an opt-in feature for those who want it for themselves. Make them have to choose switch it on. To have it defaulted 'on' would be retrograde. The vast majority of users who will not realise you can turn it off; it will be a blotch on the technological landscape: some new editors may be put off from staying to edit a site that has a very strong culture of its own, plus such an archaic notification system. -- Ohconfucius ^{ping / poke} 09:51, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

• I don't care, I just want the functionality of the orange bar back, either as a default or a preference that I can easily set. I want a notification that appears right after someone leaves a talk page message for me, and not hours later, I want a link to the diff. The new red notification has neither. Even the email I get after a message is left for me doesn't have a diff link. Nightscream (talk) 00:11, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Removed as a gadget

I've removed the gadget per Writ Keeper's request. Looking at the criteria for gadgets at Wikipedia:Gadget#General criteria for Gadgets, Gadgets must be compatible with all major browsers, i.e. they must not terminate with errors., Gadgets should be functional in most major browsers (cross-browser compatibility). Exceptions must be clearly stated., and Gadgets only working in some skins must be marked as such if that data is available. have not been met. Writ Keeper confirmed for me that he hasn't tested the script at all in Opera or Safari, and Nyttend reported an issue with IE8 that hasn't been confirmed as resolved as of yet. In addition there could be a potential issue with the Modern skin that needs to be investigated, the gadget is missing a header, and Writ hasn't had the opportunity to write proper documentation for the gadget (the current documentation).

You can of course load the script manually by going to Special:MyPage/common.js (if you want to install for all skins), Special:MyPage/vector.js (if you just want to add it to the Vector skin) or Special:MyPage/monobook.js (if you're using Monobook) and adding importScript("User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/orangeBar.js"); on a new line.

Please give Writ Keeper some time to properly test and document the gadget before we add it back, which will also allow us to judge the consensus of the "on by default" discussion in the section above. Pinging User:Spinningspark, User:Ignatzmice, User:MBisanz, User:Edokter and User:Rd232 as some of the most active users in the above discussion, please don't be angry if I missed pinging you. Thehelpfulone 23:27, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I confirm that I requested this; the request came at the tail end of an IRC discussion on the subject, so I apologize that there's no paper trail for it. As Thehelpfulone says, the requirements for a gadget are that it is compatible with all browsers; there has been an issue in IE8 where the script crashes, for which I have not received confirmation from the user that it has been fixed, and I have not done any testing at all in Safari or Opera, or in Wikipedia skins other than Vector or Monobook. Moreover, the more I've thought about it, the more I feel that I should not be the only one to test or vet this; I think that there should be at least one other person, skilled at JS (particularly JQuery, which I use extensively) and the MediaWiki API and trusted by the community, to look at the code and vouch for it; mine should not be the only eyes on this. User scripts are explicitly "use at your own risk", but the same cannot be said of an official gadget available through the Preferences screen; I feel comfortable enough to release my script as the former, but not as the latter. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 23:33, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Ah, oops, sorry — I've not replied to Writ Keeper precisely because I didn't notice the most recent message, since the orange bar isn't yet working for me. To be more precise, it's not working in the 256-bit version of IE 8.0.7601.17514. Nyttend (talk) 00:05, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Works fine in Safari. Ignatzmice•talk 00:46, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I can also confirm that it works fine on Safari. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 00:59, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Something just got changed, because it just now appeared when someone left me a message. I'm using the same browser with the same cookie settings as before, and I've not cleared my cache in the last few minutes. Nyttend (talk) 02:44, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

• I suggest it be re-added and defaulted; the list on WP:Gadget seems to differentiate between "failing with errors" and "failing gracefully", and I haven't seen any indication of it actually breaking things—only failing to do its job, which is a bummer for some people but not a reason to deny it to others, and in addition User:Nyttend reported the problem gone. There is clear consensus, both here and in #Yes above, for it to be default-on; it's very easy to turn it off if people so desire. Obviously User:Writ Keeper should get another pair of eyes on it ASAP, and of course anyone (especially WK) is welcome to edit/move the documentation page I made. But I'd like to get this show rolling again. User:Edokter's suggestion below is a good idea, but the mw.notify badge is small (I uploaded a screenshot) and disappears quickly, and it still isn't working. Ignatzmice•talk 15:55, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Also note that it works in all skins except Cologne Blue—but Cologne Blue doesn't even have the old orange bar, so that's not the script's fault. See here. Ignatzmice•talk 16:02, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
    • What you may not realize is that Javascript tends to fail silently--but that doesn't mean it's failing gracefully. Usually the only sign that an end user would get when a script breaks is that that script and any others that would've been executed after it will not load. So, I have this script at the top of my .js page; if it fails with an error, I won't see the error (unless I look at the dev console), but none of my scripts will load. This is even worse when it's a gadget, IIRC; I believe those get loaded before any user scripts do, so an error in a gadget--while still being silent to an end-user not looking for it--will cause all of their user scripts, and possibly some of their gadgets, to also fail to load. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:22, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
• There is no need for the script to work with every browser as long as we indicate which ones it works for. There are several gadgets (including Twinkle) that do not work with some browsers. Kumioko (talk) 17:26, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
  • For such an essential function as talk page notifications, we need a 100% reliable mechanism. There is no excuse for not having working notifications for those new users not having the right browser. How would we indicate to them that their browser is not compatible? — Edokter (talk) — 18:09, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
    • Moreover, when this was pushed to everyone as a default-on gadget, we didn't know which browsers (or Wikipedia skins) it would work for, because I didn't extensively test other browsers/skins, and nobody asked me what testing I had done before they pushed it willy-nilly. Again, I developed it with the mindest of a user script: I would create it the best I could, do whatever testing was reasonable at the time, and let users report problems they stumble across. That's not enough for any official gadget, much less a default-on gadget. (As an aside, Edokter, I think your script is a much better idea for a gadget than mine; let my script serve the oldbies who don't want to let go of their orange, and let yours serve the newbies who need more visual notification.) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:15, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
      • Well for what its worth I have been preaching that the WMF needs to step up and start making decisions because we as a community have repeatedly shown we are incapable of implementing changes. So as far as I am concerned we get what we deserve. If we were capable of making decisions then the WMF wouldn't have to drop a bomb like this on us and deal with the fallout. I don't like this change but at the same time I wish the WMF would make a lot more decisions so I can live with it. I still think it falls into the category of an uneeded unwanted change and the time used to create it would have been better spent on a lot of other things but oh well. I also think this change is going a long way in the wrong direction towards making Wikipedia easier for editors and is much akin to the hated Facebook timeline implementation. As for the newbies/oldby's comment. The new implementation is going to cause a lot of messages to go unanswered by all, basically makes IP notifications useless. The only ones who are going to respond are going to be those of us that go and use Writ keepers script so we can see the changes. I went 2 days and didn't even notice I had a message. Kumioko (talk) 21:08, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Another approach

Just brainstorming... There should be a far easier way to grab the attention of new editors without having to resort to JSON. Noting (below) that the notification icon has the class .mw-badge-important Reading the , it should be trivial to trigger a standard mw.notify message indicating to the user that there are new notifications. Basically a single line of javascript. (Moved code to gadget: Mediawiki:Gadget-Notification.js and Mediawiki:Gadget-Notification.css.) This should have the exact same effect, except users get a notification bubble, not an orange bar. — Edokter (talk) — 11:21, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

• I'll see how that looks, but I just want to say first: one of the problems with Echo is that a Notification includes more things than a talk-page change. We want something obvious and unambiguous when we're communicating with new users that says "OI! YOU'VE GOT MAIL!". Ignatzmice•talk 11:25, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
  • That's the beauty of it. It's fairly intuitive as it notifies editors of a number of happenings, so that when the editor (however uninitiated) eventually get a talk page comment, they are more likely to have been 'trained' to look for it instinctively. What's more, the little red tag has to be activated, as it doesn't disappear like the Orange banner does once you have clicked on the talk page. -- Ohconfucius ^{ping / poke} 10:08, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
• Okay, I may be a little thick, but that looks like it ought to be a stand-alone script. No? Do I have to add it into WK's script? I'm getting nothing but the Echo number—what's it supposed to look like? Ignatzmice•talk 11:29, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
  • OOPS, there was a syntax error. Try again. — Edokter (talk) — 11:51, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
    • @Edokter: Aaah, I should've been able to see that. But I'm still getting nothing but Echo. (It's not my cache, 'cause when I comment/un-comment WK's orangeBar it does change.) Ignatzmice•talk 11:57, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
      • I just found out the script is triggering too early when in user space. This may be different for a gadget, so I will set up a test gadget. — Edokter (talk) — 12:11, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
        • If I comment out the if-statement (and closing bracket), I can see it. It's small and it fades after a few seconds. (I'll upload a screenshot, if I can figure out the licensing. ) Ignatzmice•talk 12:15, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
          • No dice there either. How can I ensure my script is run after the notification script is done. Can I call a callback function? — Edokter (talk) — 12:22, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
        • Screenshot here, if anyone's interested. The badge scrolls up off the screen after ~6 seconds. I think we should just keep the orange bar. Ignatzmice•talk 12:24, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I think this is a great idea. However, there needs to be an alternative for people without scripts enabled. The orange bar worked without any need for JavaScript. – PartTimeGnome (talk | contribs) 15:26, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

That cannot be solved locally. — Edokter (talk) — 16:28, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, you are quite right (as you already know, I tried something myself). My comment is more of a general plea the developers. Hopefully whatever they deploy on Tuesday will be an improvement. – PartTimeGnome (talk | contribs) 21:52, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Finally got the script to work properly. Code is above. — Edokter (talk) — 17:02, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I ran into that problem too; the DOM changes as the JS gets called, and what's available to the script is not the same as what's on the final page. Anyway, I actually use something similar to what you propose in my script by doing var numNotes = /\d+/.exec($("#pt-notifications").text())[0]; to retrieve the number of new notifications, but my script then goes on to figure out what kind of notifications they are. Yours will produce an alert on any notification, including name mentions and the like, while mine only triggers on talk-page-post alerts. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:42, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I think we need to step away from the idea that it should work "exactly" like the old ways; a popup on any notification is not a bad thing. If anything, it familiarizes new editors faster with the new notification system. Hanging on to the OBOD will only confuse matters. — Edokter (talk) — 17:49, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not doing it because it's teh old way; I'm doing it because in my opinion, a talk page post is the only notification really worth caring about. The others are nice but unnecessary. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:01, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Not running after all Exactly. It's good for the newbies to learn about Echo, but it's essential for them to know they have a new message. Ignatzmice•talk 19:09, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

New gadget

Screenshot of red popup gadget

Screenshot of orange popup gadget

I invite anyone to test the gadget now in place. — Edokter (talk) — 17:53, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

• The red is very noticeable; it works in all skins (in my limited test, just on Safari). It still goes away quickly, and I think something window-wide would be good. Gotta run! Ignatzmice•talk 18:59, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

• there';s a basic misunderstanding here--while it is good to find a better solution, the first step is to remove the one that did not work. I am amazed that over 3 days have now passed without doing that. the developers have said for several years now how they want to be responsive to the community. Let them show it. DGG ( talk ) 19:08, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

• @Edokter: Much nicer than the previous gadget, I think. This method is quite similar to some of the options Fabrice and the team have discussed for how to make new notifications more prominent, interestingly enough. I think using the mw.notify style like you seem to be doing works from a placement and interaction standpoint, least as a temporary measure. However I find the red background to be incomplete (i.e. it doesn't fill the whole container) and too obnoxious. The animation alone really strongly brings a lot of attention when it happens, so I would prefer you remove the red. Red is an even louder color than orange, and generally denotes a problem or warning, rather than neutral information. One smaller suggestion: the title should maybe be "New notifications!" or "You have new notifications!". Steven Walling • talk 00:27, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

• He is indeed using mw.notify, which means it disappears soon enough (something I'd prefer didn't happen, but oh well). I think the red background is good—it fits in with the Notifications system, and so long as we get a link to a doc page (I'll start another one, hurray!) I think it'll be fine. If the red really is too much, it can be the same color as the orange bar (#ffce7b). New screenshot added 12:41, 6 May 2013 (UTC) Ignatzmice•talk 00:32, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
• Documentation at Wikipedia:Notifications/Popup documentation. Edit/move as you see fit. Ignatzmice•talk 00:42, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

• Could we make it so that clicking on the actual badge will have the same effect as clicking on the red badge next to your username? Thehelpfulone 00:46, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

• Agree. This script here seems to be the Echo script; if someone (User:Edokter) wants to dig through it and see what, exactly, happens when you click on the little box, it might be possible to call that function as well when you click on the big badge. But I would recommend we not do that, in the interests of not breaking things by getting in over our heads. Ignatzmice•talk 01:05, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

• If you're trying to find the Echo source code, the extension documentation and repository summary have links to it in a much nicer format than grabbing it from bits, which just serves assets. Steven Walling • talk 01:09, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for the comments Steve. I am indeed actually using an mw.notify popup, which limits me in styling, so there will always be some unused space. I chose the red to match the badge color, but I could limit that to the first line only. Not sure about the "!", that seems over the top. — Edokter (talk) — 11:32, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Okay. I'm trying to get a link to the doc page (I won't even think about messing with the Echo script, sorry THO) and I can't get a link to work inside the notification. So what I've done is set up this in my common.css:

div.mw-notification-alert-footer {
    font-size: 50%;
    text-align: center;
}

and then stick this between "...to see your notifications." and the final closing div: <div class="mw-notification-alert-footer">You can turn this off in Preferences>Gadgets</div>. Does that seem reasonable? Ignatzmice•talk 02:01, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

I can make a link work inside the notification, and I could make it link directly to the gadgets page. — Edokter (talk) — 11:32, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Now linking to the doc page, which I moved to Wikipedia:Notifications/Popup documentation. — Edokter (talk) — 12:04, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

I say go ahead and make it default. It works in every browser/skin I've tried (which are these ones), and that link to the doc page is well-worded. It's very simple to turn it off. Ignatzmice•talk 12:48, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

I would like a little more approval before doing that, even if it is only for 24 hours. — Edokter (talk) — 13:40, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Agreed, @Ignatzmice: please don't encourage the addition of code that needs to be properly reviewed first (even if it is relatively simple code) before it's added as default across the site. Thehelpfulone 14:34, 6 May 2013 (UTC)