[Bug 73634] New: Move global user page footer from ?action=view to ?action=edit

[b***@wikimedia.org]

https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=73634

Bug ID: 73634
Summary: Move global user page footer from ?action=view to
?action=edit
Product: MediaWiki extensions
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: Unprioritized
Component: GlobalUserPage
Assignee: wikibugs-***@lists.wikimedia.org
Reporter: ***@mzmcbride.com
CC: ***@countervandalism.net,
***@gmail.com, ***@gmail.com
Web browser: ---
Mobile Platform: ---

GlobalUserPage adds a footer to ?action=view currently. It reads:

This is a global user page. The original page is located at
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Example

This footer doesn't sit well with me.

* I don't really want an ugly footer on my global user page.

* It's an irrelevant internal implementation detail — why should I care where
the page content lives, I'm interested in the user page content, not its
location.

* The message can read with a remedial tone; you can imagine the footer reading
"You're on a Web site. Using a Web browser. This is the Internet."

I'd like the disclaimer to be moved from ?action=view to ?action=edit (the edit
screen), where people will actually be interested in where the page content
lives. If the user is interested in editing the content, they'll then care
about where the "original" page lives. Otherwise, it's a user page and it
should be a decision of the user to note that the page is hosted on a central
wiki.

It would also be nice if the edit disclaimer included a direct edit link to the
page on the central wiki. It could read something like this (very rough
wording... please improve!):

"Currently this user page is set to use your [[global user page]]: <link>
(edit). Creating a local user page suppresses the global user page."

[b***@wikimedia.org]

https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=73634

Quiddity <***@gmail.com> changed:

What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
See Also| |https://bugzilla.wikimedia.
| |org/show_bug.cgi?id=66931

[b***@wikimedia.org]

https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=73634

--- Comment #1 from Quiddity <***@gmail.com> ---
Background:
The template footer was proposed/added in Bug 66931 ("Add a template message at
the transcluded locations, to indicate the source")

Bug 70629 proposes changing the background color of the div (currently
unspecified) to #F9F9F9 - this border-color and background-color will then
match the styling of the generic boxes for Categories, Infoboxes, ToC, etc.

Bug 70576 comment 13 proposes moving the template to the top:
(from Krinkle)

(In reply to Kunal Mehta (Legoktm))

If a local user page does not exist, and the user has a global account
attached on the local wiki and the central wiki, their user page from the
central wiki will be displayed, with a notice below it indicating (..)

From a user experience perspective, I think such a notice should be
displayed on top. Which we do for file description pages as well (below the
thumbnail, but atop the actual page contents). It should not be longer than
a single line of text and not be grabbing much attention. Similar to how
MediaWiki core handles foreign files (e.g. from Commons), though various
Wikimedia wikis have overridden that line of text with a centred box.

Personally, I'm not very-strongly attached to the original template idea, nor
its top/bottom location. It seemed like something the communities would ask
for, so I preemptively filed a bug for it, and tried to match the Commons File:
template layout/location in a way that wouldn't impede the lovely styling some
users create. Wider input would probably be good.

[b***@wikimedia.org]

https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=73634

--- Comment #2 from James Alexander <***@wikimedia.org> ---
While it's true that there is a possibility that the top template could be a
bit more annoying for some (though not most) custom styling on a user page I
think the benefits will end up outweigh those downsides. The biggest thing is
that the template/marker can:

1. Be translated/localized meaning that the users will understand it where they
may not understand the long user page in 'not their language' and so putting it
on top is important so that they don't miss it or have to slog through a longer
harder to understand user page confused.

2. It's a long tail communication method, there will be a lot of people who
don't hear about this feature when we roll it out (most people, though most of
them won't use the feature often) and this allows them to learn about it
organically when they come across the feature.

3. The top position allows people to know this is global right away and make it
less likely that they try to engage on that project (where it's less likely
they will get a response) assuming it's a local account.

[b***@wikimedia.org]

https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=73634

James Forrester <***@wikimedia.org> changed:

What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |***@wikimedia.org
Summary|Move global user page |Decide what to do about the
|footer from ?action=view to |global user page banner
|?action=edit |

--- Comment #3 from James Forrester <***@wikimedia.org> ---
I strongly think that the banner should remain on action=view, but go on top
for consistency for cross-cluster pulling of media files.

(Re-titling per Lego.)