@Strainu - the change @Jdlrobson referred to is now live. Can you check if this is still an issue. I also can't reproduce from my side (with Twinkle turned on)

Resolving this. Disabling the test will be tracked in T265333: End A/B test for search location

All done!

@Jdlrobson, @alexhollender - that sounds good. Did we decide on what we were going to lower it to? 500px?

Estimating as XL, but will come back when we have more info on the state of performance review

Task for this quarter here: T258806: Q1 Community outreach for desktop improvements

Quick update from the web team: we discussed this a bit yesterday and think that a good first step would be to add the indicators to the Advanced mode on mobile and try to measure usage among editors there prior to conversations about wider release. I'd like to note that we're in the middle of the desktop improvements project and thus follow-up on this might be a little bit slow as it's not a high priority for us at the moment. That said, our designer @alexhollender will be thinking about placement and styling and will update the task with some mocks and guidelines within the next couple of weeks so we can start moving this forward.

In T263032#6518798, @MNeisler wrote:

We decided that these search changes will be rolled back if we see a 5% overall decrease in search sessions initiated. @ovasileva - Is that correct?

All done!

@Urbanecm - thanks for bringing this up! A couple of notes/replies:

• We introduced fixed with to content pages to improve readability. You can read more about the rationale behind our decision and more information on the actual width we settled on our project page here: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Web/Desktop_Improvements/Features/Limiting_content_width, as well as in our FAQ here: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Web/Desktop_Improvements/Frequently_asked_questions#Why_is_the_width_of_the_content_limited?_Why_is_there_so_much_white_space?
• For special pages, which are meant to be scannable, we decided that a fixed width is not necessary, as the page is not meant to be read from top to bottom like an article. Thus, all special pages currently do not have a limited width.
• This does create some awkwardness in terms of the tabs placement and styling. We will be slowly improving this area over the course of the project. The first change we will make here is to move the search bar into the top of the page. This is already deployed on all of our early adopter wikis, as well as for all users that have opted in using their preferences. On our early adopter wikis, we are also running an A/B test to measure the increase (if any) in the amount of search sessions based on the new location. From the screenshot above, it seems that you have been bucketed into our control group (the likelihood of which is 50% on our early adopter wikis). The test will run for two weeks, after which, we expect all special pages to look like this:

Done!

Looks good, thanks @Edtadros!

@kzimmerman, @dchen, @MNeisler - I think it will be okay to wait until Megan is back next week

In T263905#6502189, @MMiller_WMF wrote:

FYI, @Dyolf77_WMF independently noticed this today.

FYI @olga -- in case you want to keep track of any reverberations from your team's updates. It looks like we are fixing this one.

A quick look at Turnillo shows that use of Firefox 1-3 is approximately 580K per week across the wiki, with no particularly high usage in any given country. Based on this, I think we can go forward with the task as suggested.

In T263834#6494516, @nray wrote:

Not sure if the question should be asked in that way as it seems a bit of a leading question (assumes that the change might be disruptive). Something like "What are your impressions of the this tab order compared to this tab order" might be less suggestive