Wikipedia talk:Ultraviolet/2020/October
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:Ultraviolet. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Rollback
The information about the tool's informaluse of rollback is not necessarily supported by policy. The link given does not contain the text cited, and is in any case an essay. The actual links is the guideline, WP:ROLLBACKUSE, section 2, which does contain the text 'The above restrictions apply to standard rollback, using the generic edit summary. If a tool or manual method is used to add an appropriate explanatory edit summary (as described in the Additional tools section below), then rollback may be freely used as with any other method of reverting."
Using the tool in tis manner is dangerous advice unless clarified further. My advice is that it not be called ROLLBACK, but that the manual method here be called simply Revert. I should mention that I've been an admin for 10 years, and never found the need to use actual rollback. . DGG ( talk ) 23:44, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- @DGG: I don't see what you mean here. The link in the "A disclaimer regarding rollback" section cites WP:ROLLBACKUSE itself, not any "essay" that you're mentioning, and cites the exact statement that you included, with the exception of the first sentence. Could you clarify yourself a bit more, please? Chlod (say hi!) 02:27, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Rollback in RedWarn is used interchangeably with a "rollback-like" feature, similar to Twinkles. Using rollback is faster, and can be used interchangeably with the added edit summary. The info in the rollback section is mainly to clarify for disputes regarding rollback use as the policies regarding tools using rollback (such as us or Huggle) may not be immediately obvious. Ed talk! 05:12, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
graphic interface
There are very good features her; for me, it would be especially the ability to preview and modify warnings. Unfortunately, I am very unlikely to use them, because graphic interface for tasks involving the manipulation of written text are counter-intuitive, at least for me. (And I doubt they meet WP:ACCESSIBILITY ). DGG ( talk ) 23:50, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- @DGG: I understand that you're not into the graphical system that we're using for RedWarn. Though your previous edit on Wikipedia:RedWarn which added
for those more comfortable with graphics than with the English language
may apply to you, it doesn't necessarily apply to everyone who uses RedWarn. We strive to make sure that RedWarn's icons are universally understandable so that it'll be easier to learn and understand the actions that the icons represent. RedWarn doesn't cater to users who prefer graphical UI more. In fact, RedWarn's uses tooltips to ensure that each icon is given an appropriate meaning and to ensure that there is always a text-based alternative in case you fail to understand the icons. If you're extremely sure that the RedWarn developers only cater to those who like graphics more, then feel free to add that part back in. As for accessibility, internal talks about following WAI-ARIA are ongoing. Regarding your link to WP:ACCESSIBILITY, the page itself only defines technical specifications for articles (as expected, as it is a part of WP:MOS, which applies toall English Wikipedia articles.
, and doesn't place any requirement (nor suggestions or comments) for web accessibility on tools nor userscripts. Chlod (say hi!) 02:27, 20 October 2020 (UTC)- I am very much aware of the lack of accessibility of many of our most basic features. But I'm glad to hear your use tooltips--that usually is enough for me. Please don't take this as an attempt to interfere where I may not be wanted, but rather as an attempt to keep the issue alive. (I became much more sensitive to all this recently, when for two months after surgery I was able to use only one hand. Another two months and i would have figured out the more complicated of the assistive devices; and my problem was trivial compared to many here. ) DGG ( talk ) 07:35, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- @DGG: Ah, it's no problem at all. I'm glad to hear that the tooltips work well. Given this discussion, I'm sure that accessibility will be taken in to consideration during development as soon as we get more free time on our hands. Thanks a lot for reaching out to us!
Chlod (say hi!) 07:43, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- @DGG: Ah, it's no problem at all. I'm glad to hear that the tooltips work well. Given this discussion, I'm sure that accessibility will be taken in to consideration during development as soon as we get more free time on our hands. Thanks a lot for reaching out to us!
- I am very much aware of the lack of accessibility of many of our most basic features. But I'm glad to hear your use tooltips--that usually is enough for me. Please don't take this as an attempt to interfere where I may not be wanted, but rather as an attempt to keep the issue alive. (I became much more sensitive to all this recently, when for two months after surgery I was able to use only one hand. Another two months and i would have figured out the more complicated of the assistive devices; and my problem was trivial compared to many here. ) DGG ( talk ) 07:35, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
