MediaWiki talk:Histlegend

Recent edits

The explanation of the radio buttons is unnecessary -- the "Compare selected versions" button pretty much explains it all so if anything needs to be changed to make that clearer, it should be the button. Also, some changes to the table are bad; if I thought there was nothing wrong with the original wording, I would have used it. There is often more than one difference between revisions, so perhaps an s in brackets should be added to the end of the word "difference" if any change needs to be made to that at all. The word "last" isn't needed and can complicate things, and "now" isn't as clear as the wording that I used. J Di 18:15, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Never overestimate the people who use this site... just look at some of the edits we get here...! I don't think it hurts to explain the radio buttons for a beginner, even if it seems silly to us experienced users. 'Difference' in the abstract can mean overall difference, even if it includes several small differences, but that is a minor point. I don't see what the problem is with "last", it makes it a little clearer. As for "now" I agree it is not as specifically correct as "the current one" but that seems flawed by the fact that "current" is advanced vocabulary for some people, as well as ambiguous; so I thought "now" would be clear enough. Blockinblox - talk 18:22, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

This table already uses a lot of space, and information that is already explained in a button just uses more. I was a new user once, and I had more trouble understanding how the diffs and formatting worked than what the radio buttons did.

Using the word last makes things less clear, even with the words "one before it" after it; "Click to see difference between this version and the last one before it" just makes a lot less sense to me than "Click to see differences between this revision and the one before it".

The word current is on Wikipedia:Basic English alphabetical wordlist, so if you assumed it was not on there and you were going by that list when you say that it is advanced vocabulary, it can't be that difficult a word. J Di 18:31, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Couple points:

1. "Last" gets a little confusing because it could refer to the edit just before the one being compared or the last edit listed (which would actually be the first edit made) depending on how someone want to look at it. Changed - does not apply
2. I think "Compare to Current version" works better than "compare to now". Current is BE850 and also used when looking at revisions of the pages (the link at the top: Previous revision - Current revision - next revision ... could we change "revision" to "version"? That seems like it would be a simplier term). Changed - does not apply
3. The entire table layout itself is not needed, it takes up a lot of space where just the three lines of text would get the instructions across fine.
4. "Click to" - if the user cannot figure out on their own to click a link to get it to work, I am pretty certain they could not get to this page in the first place and have no business editing it in the second place. "Click to" is just not needed. -- Creol(talk) 18:47, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Do you have anything to say in regards to the text about the radio buttons? J Di 19:09, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Let me first reply to Creol's points:

3. I also think that a table is not needed. When I first saw it (today), it took me quite some time to figure out that it was supposed to tell me how to use the page. I think a list would be better, especially with a heading "Editing help" or so.

4. I have no issues with "click to", per se. The explanations which are found directly on the page should be a bit less wordy, however. Verbose explanations need a separate help page.

Now my personal remarks: I never knew what the links "cur" and "last" were there for (being a user of WP for a couple of years now). Therefore, I am not so sure whether a new user really needs to be told what they are there for. The page can be used perfectly well without this knowledge. In any case, text might be less disruptive to the overall display of the page than a table. The best thing to do, in my opinion, would be to add titles to the links (cur) and (last) which explain their purpose. In that case, there would be even less of a need to add help text to the page itself. There is no need to give the user the alternative of pressing <Enter>, I think. Finally, the first thing the page should say, and the only thing it absolutely must say is what it is there for. I have started a gallery below, to show what I think it could look like. --rimshot^talk 20:12, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Gallery

Version A (Rimshot)

Here you can take a look at older versions of this page and compare different versions.

• Click the date to see an old version.
• To compare two versions, click the circles (in separate columns) beside them. Then click the Compare button to see the differences between them.
• You can use (cur) to compare a version with the newest one. You can use (last) to compare a version with the one before it.
• The letter m besides an edit means that the change was marked as minor.

feedback on Rimshot's version A

This looks good to me, I like it, and you explained your reasons well... I would only change "besides" to "beside" but that's it... Blockinblox - talk 21:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Clean and simple. Says everything that needs to be said. (but yeah, lose the extra "s" in besides :) ) -- Creol(talk) 21:08, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, I do have the excuse of not being a native speaker :) --rimshot^talk 09:32, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

---

Version B (Werdan7)

Directions: click the circles (in separate columns) beside any two versions you want to compare, then click the Compare button to see the differences.

Abbreviation	What it means
(cur)	Click to see difference between this version and the newest one
(last)	Click to see difference between this version and the one before it
m	A change that was marked as minor

feedback on Werdan7's version B

Similar to the current version, mostly justed messed around with formatting, and removed background.--Werdan7^{T @} 00:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Page view statistics

{{edit protected}}

Please change the link to point to:

//tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?project=simple.wikipedia.org&pages={{FULLPAGENAMEE}}

stats.grok.se no longer works and is considerably inaccurate by comparison (did not include mobile views, for instance). The new tool uses the WMF-provided pageviews API. Hope this helps MusikAnimal (talk) 04:53, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Done. Thank you! Chenzw  Talk  12:07, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

@Chenzw: You may want to also update the link in MediaWiki:Pageinfo-footer. Best MusikAnimal (talk) 23:18, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Updated the other link. Thanks! Chenzw  Talk  01:44, 16 May 2016 (UTC)