Last modified: 2014-11-21 00:29:25 UTC
GlobalUserPage adds a footer to ?action=view currently. It reads: This is a global user page. The original page is located at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Example This footer doesn't sit well with me. * I don't really want an ugly footer on my global user page. * It's an irrelevant internal implementation detail — why should I care where the page content lives, I'm interested in the user page content, not its location. * The message can read with a remedial tone; you can imagine the footer reading "You're on a Web site. Using a Web browser. This is the Internet." I'd like the disclaimer to be moved from ?action=view to ?action=edit (the edit screen), where people will actually be interested in where the page content lives. If the user is interested in editing the content, they'll then care about where the "original" page lives. Otherwise, it's a user page and it should be a decision of the user to note that the page is hosted on a central wiki. It would also be nice if the edit disclaimer included a direct edit link to the page on the central wiki. It could read something like this (very rough wording... please improve!): "Currently this user page is set to use your [[global user page]]: <link> (edit). Creating a local user page suppresses the global user page."
Background: The template footer was proposed/added in Bug 66931 ("Add a template message at the transcluded locations, to indicate the source") Bug 70629 proposes changing the background color of the div (currently unspecified) to #F9F9F9 - this border-color and background-color will then match the styling of the generic boxes for Categories, Infoboxes, ToC, etc. Bug 70576 comment 13 proposes moving the template to the top: (from Krinkle) > (In reply to Kunal Mehta (Legoktm)) > > If a local user page does not exist, and the user has a global account > > attached on the local wiki and the central wiki, their user page from the > > central wiki will be displayed, with a notice below it indicating (..) > > From a user experience perspective, I think such a notice should be > displayed on top. Which we do for file description pages as well (below the > thumbnail, but atop the actual page contents). It should not be longer than > a single line of text and not be grabbing much attention. Similar to how > MediaWiki core handles foreign files (e.g. from Commons), though various > Wikimedia wikis have overridden that line of text with a centred box. Personally, I'm not very-strongly attached to the original template idea, nor its top/bottom location. It seemed like something the communities would ask for, so I preemptively filed a bug for it, and tried to match the Commons File: template layout/location in a way that wouldn't impede the lovely styling some users create. Wider input would probably be good.
While it's true that there is a possibility that the top template could be a bit more annoying for some (though not most) custom styling on a user page I think the benefits will end up outweigh those downsides. The biggest thing is that the template/marker can: 1. Be translated/localized meaning that the users will understand it where they may not understand the long user page in 'not their language' and so putting it on top is important so that they don't miss it or have to slog through a longer harder to understand user page confused. 2. It's a long tail communication method, there will be a lot of people who don't hear about this feature when we roll it out (most people, though most of them won't use the feature often) and this allows them to learn about it organically when they come across the feature. 3. The top position allows people to know this is global right away and make it less likely that they try to engage on that project (where it's less likely they will get a response) assuming it's a local account.
I strongly think that the banner should remain on action=view, but go on top for consistency for cross-cluster pulling of media files. (Re-titling per Lego.)
