This task represents the work involved with making sure the language people encounter on talk pages is discussion-specific, wherever possible.

An example of "discussion-specific" language would be changing the dialog that is presented to people when they attempt to discard a comment they've started writing in the Reply tool to refer to what they are doing as publishing a "comment" vs. saving an "edit".

We are saying "wherever possible" because there are some instances where the discussion-specific language would be limiting and potentially confusing.

An example of the above case: were the abandon edit dialogs that are presented in the full page editing interface to change from "edit" language to more specific "commenting" or "starting a new discussion" language. Reason: we think the language being specific in this context could create a mismatch between the action someone is taking (e.g. correct a typo) and the dialog they are seeing (e.g. "Are you sure you want to discard the comment you drafted?") and thus lead them to become confused.

In T240271#5728573, @ppelberg wrote:

In T240271#5728480, @Esanders wrote:

These are the default messages for AbandonEdit, which we can override:

Note that we will eventually have at least three "modes":

• Replying
• New topics
• Editing replies

So we may want to keep the language fairly generic to support all these.

Are we able to have the language be more discussion-specific? E.g. something like, "Are you sure? / Are you sure you want to discard your draft?"

Thinking
Having the interface contain more discussion-specific language and actions will lead Junior Contributors to understand talk pages as places to communicate with other contributors.

Rationale
In the most recent user test we ran, one contributor, "...did not edit using the "edit" button, but instead used the "create new section" tab." This contributor went on to say, "It was hard to find an actual reply button so the only option was to create a new subject and tag the user or edit his subject with my answer."

I wonder if the above could be considered evidence to support this idea that repurposing language and actions from the article-editing is confusing to contributors who are not familiar with talk pages.