@abian can you clarify what you mean with the acceptance criteria?

In T229100#5551887, @Lydia_Pintscher wrote:

@abian can you clarify what you mean with the acceptance criteria?

MediaWiki messages sometimes have parameters for the displayed values to be customized; for example, MediaWiki:Rollbacklinkcount has one parameter, $1, to show the number of edits to be reverted, which also lets us write "edit" (if 1) or "edits" (if not 1).

Here I'm suggesting to create a MediaWiki message with which we can specify the target URL of the feedback links, but with some parameters (if possible, at least title of the protected page and property ID of the statement). This would give us and Wikibase instance owners the possibility to change the feedback links by modifying the content of the corresponding page in the MediaWiki namespace, so it might not be necessary to make new changes to the Wikibase code in case we want to improve the feedback strategy in the future. These parameters let us include the arguments pre-filled in possible requests for change/attention, categorize requests selectively or even direct messages to one page or another depending on the property ID of the statement or the entity type to which the user draws attention. Similar to an error report, the more parameters about the environment, the user and the data are added to the MediaWiki message, the better and more efficient the response can be. It's merely optional to use the available arguments in the final message, and surely the first links we have won't use them because they'll be simple links to the corresponding talk pages, but this option is probably not the best (it will cause many messages to be ignored, just as many of them are right now), so we and the owners of Wikibase instances would have room to improve, update or customize the links at any time (e.g., in case we want to centralize feedback or requests for change on one or a few general pages).

@MisterSynergy @Multichill @Sjoerddebruin, others: any particular thoughts on where the link should go?

If an editor cannot edit an entity due to a page protection, I think it would be the best to just replace all the "edit" links (in terms box, all statement boxes, sitelinks box) on the protected entity page with something useful, such as a link to an appropriate page, or a tooltip explaining the situation and indicating options for the editor. Currently those "edit" links are just missing if one is not allowed to edit the page which massively breaks the usual workflow and makes it difficult to figure our what options one still has.

We currently have a "Protection indicators" gadget available that adds a lock icon on protected pages near the upper right corner of the viewport. I have it activated, but I barely take notice of these icons. Thus, I think there is no optimal place where a link should go, except for the places of the "edit" links that one usually expects to see on an unprotected page.

Mind that the mockup in the task description above already shows how this could (roughly) look like.

Yeah. My main question is about where the link should point. Talk page of the item? Project chat? Dedicated page? Somewhere else?

I think the reasonable default option is the talk page, thinking of all Wikibase instances. On Wikidata this won't be the most efficient possible solution, but it may serve until the community discusses and agrees on a more definitive solution for Wikidata, IMHO. Right now we have https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Template:Edit_request. If the URL were defined by a MediaWiki message, the community would be able to change the default link (e.g., https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Talk:Q42) to a more specific Wikidata link (e.g., https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Q42&action=edit&section=new&preload=Template:Edit%20request/preload).

Ok makes sense. Let's go with that then.

I don't think we should encourage users to create (or edit) large number of poorly watched and maintained talk pages. We should have some way to aggregate the discussions.

link to figma file

It would be great to have this available considering T254280 and https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_permissions/Administrator/MsynABot; if there are some setbacks or this is proving more difficult than it seemed, we can comment on it, change the acceptance criteria, ask on Wikidata for ideas…