Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/test discussion

this is the beginning of a test discussion...

this text is going to end up in a sub-page as suggested in Grease pit

--MaEr (talk) 15:03, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Yay! *discusses* 18:49, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * There is a slight problem with the subpages themselves. If you click on 'edit' it takes you to a subpage of the subpage. And I also don't think the 'return' link is really needed because there is already a small link at the top. 18:50, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't know exactly what is easily modifiable and what isn't, but adding it to my watchlist was rather a pain - you have to click twice and then get to a page that doesn't seem to link back to the discussion itself. --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 23:26, 19 May 2012 (UTC)


 * CodeCat, you say: If you click on 'edit' it takes you to a subpage of the subpage. — I can reproduce this behaviour only when I open the sub-page directly, for example via this link: http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Wiktionary:Etymology_scriptorium/test_discussion. If I open the Etymology scriptorium and just click the edit link it works fine for.
 * Metaknowledge, I have made the same experience. It's a bit strange.
 * --MaEr (talk) 08:21, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Post scriptum: After saving my edit I could reproduce the error of editing a subpage of the subpage. One has to go back to the Etymology Scriptorium, otherwise the edit link and the watch link point to test discussion/test discussion . --MaEr (talk) 08:26, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * If one enters this page via the watchlist, one automatically circumvenes the Etymology Scriptorium. And then watch and edit don't point to the right (sub)page. I don't have any problems when using the edit tab and the star tab above, next to the search field. Maybe we should display these two links only when the sub-page is displayed in the ES. When the sub-page is displayed isolated, the links don't work. --MaEr (talk) 08:39, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. The edit and watch links are now only displayed from the ES. --Yair rand (talk) 17:33, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * There are a few more usability issues. If you click watch when you're already watching the page nothing happens, you keep watching it. It would be nice to have some indication of whether you're already watching a page, for example by showing 'unwatch' instead. The confirmation page is also a bit annoying, it would be even nicer if watching would work as the star icon does at the top right: Click it and it changes to mark it as now-watched or now-unwatched (and a small message appears at the top of the page), but without a need to reload the page. Then also, could there also be a 'view' link in addition to 'watch' and 'edit'? And finally, could the heading be removed from the subpage, and only be placed on the main discussion page? Maybe just put it in or else make a template to transclude it and add the heading; then those edit links won't be an issue anymore anyway. It's redundant on the subpage anyway because it has its own edit and watch buttons. 18:01, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually I just realised, if we use a template to transclude the discussion, then we could have some discussions as subpages here, and some as (sub)talk pages as needed. Being able to discuss on talk pages rather than on subpages here (should talk pages also have discussion pages eventually? It could be useful!) would especially be nice for the TR and ES where discussions often are about single entries. 18:14, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * If we could use scripting to automate the transclusion-setup part, it would remove the main problem with the way the ES was set up before. I'm not up to professional grade when it comes to computers, but I'm well above the level of most of our general user population- and I found it intimidating to start with. It should be as simple as clicking the + at the top of the page to start a new section (or even part of it), with the luxury of being blissfully ignorant of whatever templates and other code are making it happen. Of course, easier for the user means harder for the programmer, but that's the way it should work. Chuck Entz (talk) 20:55, 20 May 2012 (UTC)