jdlrobson
Some of these are made a little more complicated as they involve different teams - for example the language button is owned by a team who works on a Asia/Europe timezone (compared to our US/Europe timezone).
I think you are specifically referring to https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T325009 (still awaiting discussion) and https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T318013 (resolved next week) ?
You might be interested in the sections "WE MADE IMPROVEMENTS TO BACKWARD COMPATIBILITY" and "WE IMPROVED THIRD-PARTY SUPPORT" on https://jdlrobson.com/posts/2023-01-17_the-new-wikipedia-app... which have a few more links that might be of interest.
As I've said before the mobile site doesn't remove it. It just changes the mechanism for understandable reasons based on the medium.
Nice to chat to you.
I agree that the UX could be improved and there is plenty of evidence to support that. On the other hand the edit icon is super discoverable and used without the label so I think the challenge with the language icon is 1) there are not many multilingual sites and 2) the other icons there potentially cause the user to ignore them entirely.
Throw in the 200+ languages and longer labels in some of them and it becomes even more complicated...
How would you solve this given the limited space? A label saying languages is the mosy obvious but real estate is a little limited.
I'd hope that if the icon was prominent in desktop with a label that would reinforce its discoverability.
There's an open bug to allow you to opt out of this however we've been a bit stretched to find the time to work on this.
I built the Wikipedia mobile site and there's a reason our hamburger menu, lazy loaded images and editor actually work without JS. We are for everyone regardless of internet connection speed, device value and internet stability.
That's a a hill at least I as an employee am prepared to die on.
I sincerely regret the use of that statement "people seem to like it" in my post. I've now removed it as I worry this confuses my message so thank you for pointing it out. This really trivializes all the work that went into A/B testing this and how we measured success. I really recommend a read of https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Page_Previews#Success_Metrics... Side note: the volume of traffic was also wrong by several magnitudes... actually 0.5 million)
My main motivation when writing this post was to share how small changes require magnitudes of effort not to express the merits of the feature. As a developer who works with product owners a lot and often get asked how I can build things quicker (I'm sure many can relate). I wanted to provide something useful to other developers that easy looking things are not actually easy to build, so thanks for flagging.
With regards to the user script, yeh that's been around for some time and was the seed for this idea. It's just taken a long time to get that from such a small audience to a mainstream one. It doesn't downplay it in my opinion, just shows how far we've come.
Thanks for reading.