Page MenuHomePhabricator

Add ability to thank anonymous/IP users
Open, LowPublic

Tokens
"Love" token, awarded by jayvdb."Love" token, awarded by Liuxinyu970226."Love" token, awarded by Gnom1."Love" token, awarded by waldyrious."Like" token, awarded by Cirdan."Love" token, awarded by Morten_Haan."Like" token, awarded by Luke081515.
Assigned To
None
Authored By
Skalman, Feb 7 2014

Description

When I look at edits that anonymous users have made, there is no link to thank them.

Some really good contributions are made by IP users and I don't see the reason for not being able to thank them for it.


Version: unspecified
Severity: enhancement
See Also:

This card tracks a proposal from the 2015 Community Wishlist Survey: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2015_Community_Wishlist_Survey

This proposal received 41 support votes, and was ranked #22 out of 107 proposals. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2015_Community_Wishlist_Survey/Notifications#Modify_.22Thank_you.22_so_we_can_thank_anonymous_editors

Details

Reference
bz61022

Event Timeline

bzimport raised the priority of this task from to Low.Nov 22 2014, 3:06 AM
bzimport added a project: Thanks.
bzimport set Reference to bz61022.
bzimport added a subscriber: Unknown Object (MLST).
Skalman created this task.Feb 7 2014, 12:15 PM

Long wikimedia-l thread about it (100+ posts): http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-January/thread.html#129443

Marking bug 56828 as a blocker, though as MZMcBride pointed out (http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-January/129587.html), this could easily be done without Echo using a talk page post.

(In reply to Kunal Mehta (Legoktm) from comment #1)

MZMcBride pointed out
(http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-January/129587.html),
this could easily be done without Echo using a talk page post.

This would completely break the interaction model of Thanks (that it's not about the individual showing off they've been thanked). Consider this a -2 (or, indeed, stronger) in advance of any such work being done.

(In reply to Kunal Mehta (Legoktm) from comment #1)

this could easily be done without Echo using a talk page post.

There's also no need to use Thanks extension for thanks features, we've had them for 5+ years in patrolling gadgets. See [[m:Thanks]].

(In reply to James Forrester from comment #2)

This would completely break the interaction model of Thanks (that it's not
about the individual showing off they've been thanked).

[[mw:Extension:Thanks]] doesn't seem to support what you're saying here. The purpose of the "Thanks" extension is to allow users to "thank other users for individual edits".

You seem to be putting a means above an end. Sending an Echo notification is hardly the only means of transmitting an expression of gratitude for an edit from one user to another. I'm curious what interaction model you think would be disrupted here.

Consider this a -2 (or, indeed, stronger) in advance of any such work
being done.

That's not really how -2 works, though you're welcome to express your thoughts and opinions on this enhancement request, of course.

He7d3r updated the task description. (Show Details)Apr 17 2015, 7:24 PM
He7d3r set Security to None.
Restricted Application added a project: Collaboration-Team-Triage. · View Herald TranscriptApr 17 2015, 7:24 PM
Restricted Application added a subscriber: Aklapper. · View Herald TranscriptSep 13 2015, 8:48 PM
Cirdan added a subscriber: Cirdan.
Qgil removed a subscriber: Qgil.Sep 14 2015, 5:33 AM
waldyrious added a subscriber: waldyrious.

I think this would be awesome. Thanking an anonymous edit obviously couldn't work the same as thanking a logged-in account, but it would be neat to foster the good impulse people have to say "thank you, kind stranger!" even if the person who originally made the edit has no reliable way of receiving the "thanks!". The way I could see this still being useful in practical terms is to have the "thanks" count of an edit be as public as possible, so that the person who made the edit could go back, look at the edit history for an article they edited and say "oh, neat, 7 people thanked me for that edit!"

The way I could see this still being useful in practical terms is to have the "thanks" count of an edit be as public as possible

T51087: Specify which edit was thanked in Special:Log/thanks, both for private and public records' sake, if configured to do so

Or just edit the talk page as we've done for a decade now: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Thanks

IMPORTANT: If you are a community developer interested in working on this task: The Wikimedia Hackathon 2016 (Jerusalem, March 31 - April 3) focuses on #Community-Wishlist-Survey projects. There is some budget for sponsoring volunteer developers. THE DEADLINE TO REQUEST TRAVEL SPONSORSHIP IS TODAY, JANUARY 21. Exceptions can be made for developers focusing on Community Wishlist projects until the end of Sunday 24, but not beyond. If you or someone you know is interested, please REGISTER NOW.
Restricted Application added a subscriber: JEumerus. · View Herald TranscriptJan 21 2016, 2:53 PM
DannyH updated the task description. (Show Details)Feb 5 2016, 11:54 PM

The Wikimedia-Hackathon-2016 starts tomorrow and this task is featured at T119703. We want to use T130776: Wikimedia Hackathon 2016 Opening Session to promote these projects and help recruiting volunteers to work for them.

If this task is ripe for hackathon work, please follow these instructions. If it is not ready, remove it from T119703 in order to avoid volunteers' frustration. Thank you!

kaldari updated the task description. (Show Details)Mar 31 2016, 10:39 PM
kaldari added a subscriber: kaldari.Apr 1 2016, 3:05 AM

@Jdforrester-WMF: I don't necessarily think using the talk page for anonymous editors would break the interaction model of Thanks. It would just be an exception to the existing interaction model. While I normally favor UI consistency, I think the benefits of extending Thanks via the talk page for anonymous users would probably outweigh the detriments of the inconsistency here. It should also be noted that this was a heavily endorsed proposal for the 2015 Community Wishlist Survey. Are you still strongly opposed to this feature being implemented?

If we did post a Thanks message on the Talk page, it should be changed slightly to reflect that it is coming directly from another user (via the edit API), rather than as a notification.

Thanks

Thank you for [[your edit]] on [[gumball machines]]. ~~~~

kaldari updated the task description. (Show Details)Apr 1 2016, 4:11 AM

@Jdforrester-WMF: I don't necessarily think using the talk page for anonymous editors would break the interaction model of Thanks. It would just be an exception to the existing interaction model.

Not true.

You are taking an act for users that sends a quick, private 'thanks' to someone and turns it into an edit to a talk page. For the sender, this is bad because either (a) we prompt them with different text or another step, breaking their flow, or (b) silently doing something unexpected without noting it. For the recipient, this is bad because, as shown by the community team several years ago, robotic posting, even of nicely-worded welcome or 'good job' templates let alone the more negative ones, had a negative impact on users staying around. This will be an exceptionally-robotic message; we could have a lot better impact by (say) making it trivial to write a few words in a quick-post pop-up that then sends, rather than some boiler-plate.

It should also be noted that this was a heavily endorsed proposal for the 2015 Community Wishlist Survey.

The proposal on the wishlist did not specify editing talk pages, and I don't think it's appropriate to call on that in aid of the particular solution you're pushing.

Are you still strongly opposed to this feature being implemented?

I am entirely thrilled about thanking anonymous users for their edits. I am entirely opposed to doing so through programmatic talk page messages. This task is about the former, but has been twisted to be about the latter implementation detail.

I don't necessarily think using the talk page for anonymous editors would break the interaction model of Thanks.

Agreed. Adopting an established practice of interaction with unregistered users is clearly a good thing.

Restricted Application added a project: Growth-Team. · View Herald TranscriptAug 30 2018, 5:42 PM