This Forum has been archived

Visit the new Forums
Forums: Index Watercooler New section edit
FANDOM's forums are a place for the community to help other members.
To contact staff directly or to report bugs, please use Special:Contact.

50px-Replacement filing cabinet.svg

Note: This topic has been unedited for 1831 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

The new section edit button shows up for anonymous users.


The new button only appears for Header 2 (==) and not for Header 3 (===), so you don't see a whole column of green buttons on a page like this.


Another example.

Did you know there are still some people who don't know it's possible to contribute to and edit wikis? Sad but true. To change this, we're introducing a redesigned section edit link that we think will increase participation.

Our statistics show that anonymous visitors click section edit links almost twice as often as the edit button at the top of the page. (For logged-in users, the opposite is true.) So calling attention to section edit links should be a great way to increase participation.

To make sure that people don't overlook it, we've designed a new section edit button for anonymous contributors -- a shiny, bright edit button on each heading. We made a similar change for the "Log in" buttons (upper right in Monaco skin) last year and saw a big jump in new registrations.

This change is only for anonymous contributors -- nothing will change for logged-in editors.

The new edit button only applies to main headers (==Heading 2==). Subheadings (===Heading 3===) retain the blue link. (See the second image at the right for an example.)


We plan to roll this out site-wide this Wednesday. After giving it a try, if your community would prefer the old section edit links, just send us an email at We can switch your wiki back.

As long as thoses translated, it's fine. But green is really not my fav color. :-P — TulipVorlax 23:41, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Is this only for anonymous users? Drewton (Drewton's Holocron) 23:42, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
I think so. --Spencemac724 Talk 23:44, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
The text for the button should be translated properly--it uses the same translations as the existing edit button. And yes, the changes are only active for anonymous users. You can see the changes here on Central now if you log out. --KyleH@fandom (talk) 23:45, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

I really don't like the idea (if it is for IP users). It just (to me) screams "Come click me and vandalize the entire section!" I really don't care for it. --Spencemac724 Talk 23:46, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

It probably gets more IP users of all types to edit more. I'll bet the percentage of vandalism to good-faith editing remains the same. Admins can always protect or semi-protect problem pages. I think that if this gets more people editing, then it is a good thing. --Timeshifter 07:30, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

I'd honestly want to be able to use trhis while I'm logged in cus buttons are pretty. JesseRoo

It's probably just a change to the CSS, so you could theoretically do this if you so wanted. That said, you'd have to poke Wikia about the actual CSS. --Sky (talk) 00:24, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
I don't need to worry seeing as I use Monobook and I'm registered. Hopefully it will help but I'm thinking it won't. Chicken7 >talk 00:30, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Spencemac724- while it may be good to encourage users to edit the wiki, it does seem to me like it may encourage vandalism as well Nighthawk leader 00:38, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't care as long as it doesn't mess up any articles. BPL 02:02, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, when you let anybody edit a wiki, then yeah, you're going to get some vandalism. But letting everyone edit is what a wiki is all about. When you get more people contributing to the wiki, the site gets better. Even if you get another vandal, you'll also get more good contributors. -- Danny@fandom (talk) 02:45, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

These Edit buttons seems like a good idea -- I'm glad you guys are looking at usage patterns and making changes based on that.  SkyeNiTessine (talk · contr) 02:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

"I really don't like the idea (if it is for IP users). It just (to me) screams 'Come click me and vandalize the entire section!'"
This is exactly the reason I've requested that my community's buttons return to normal. --James26 21:53, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
We've not seen any vandalism; however it doesn't make any sense to me to have a 'please edit here!' button that goes away when you register for an account. Also, bright screaming green is antithetical to the default Monaco skin. -- nae'blis 22:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
If you want the background bouton shape on edit links also for registered users, i think it's possible. I'll try it on fr.3d when i get the time. — TulipVorlax 01:13, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks!-- 23:18, 27 May 2009 (UTC)


Can we been given the id or class this is going to be use so we dont have to dig out and just prepare, at the dofus wiki we use custom colors for our buttons --Cizagna (Talk) 01:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

The class is "bigButton". If you have already styled the green "Log In" and "Create an Account" buttons that appear in the upper-right corner of the wiki for anonymous users, then the edit buttons will also be styled accordingly. --KyleH@fandom (talk) 06:22, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
So, i could make them blue... But how does it adapt to different lenght of text in it ?
Is it simply a background image ? — TulipVorlax 12:26, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

It's not easy to find anything in this but here is what i found :
#wikia_header a.bigButton {
   margin-top: -5px;
a.bigButton {
   display: block;
   float: left;
   height: 21px;
   overflow: hidden;
   padding-right: 10px;
   position: relative;
   text-decoration: none;
a.bigButton:hover {
   text-decoration: none;
a.bigButton * {
   cursor: pointer;
   float: left;
   font-family: "Lucida Grande",arial,sans-serif;
   font-size: 9pt;
   font-weight: bold;
   height: 21px;
   line-height: 21px;
a.bigButton big, a.bigButton small {
   background: url( no-repeat;
a.bigButton big {
   color: #EEE;
   padding-left: 10px;
a.bigButton small {
   clip: rect(0px 300px 21px 290px);
   position: absolute;
   right: 0;
   width: 300px;
I suppose the only thing that could be usefull to change is the URL of background image ? — TulipVorlax 13:10, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Yes, the background image is what you would want to change if you want to change the color of the button itself. If you want to change the color of the text, you would change it using the "a.bigButton big" selector. --KyleH@fandom (talk) 19:08, 27 January 2009 (UTC)


Our statistics show that anonymous visitors click section edit links almost twice as often as the edit button at the top of the page. [..] So calling attention to section edit links should be a great way to increase participation. This boils down to

  • This is the edit link that people find, so let's show it to them some more.

It's like when you see a guy who has pants and no shirt, so you go "Oh, obviously he likes pants, so why don't I sell him some more!"

The edit section links are better for inexperienced users because the amount of wikitext they see is less; they may find the edit tab at the top, but be overwhelmed by the text they see. Experienced editors aren't, and they know that they can do several edits at once, resturucture the page, and preview their edits in context if they edit the whole page. I do not see how uglifying the edit links is going to change any of that, but you're compiling statistics on that, right? And have done so on test wikis? --◄mendel► 01:31, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Good analogy. I'm not a big fan of this change, either. It will ruin the effect of slick custom skins on a wiki. Oh, well, it's not really for experienced users anyway. Exlonox 01:51, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Actually, I think the logic works great with that analogy. If I had a clothes store and I saw a guy with pants and no shirt, then yeah, he's a good prospect for more pants sales. And if business has been okay even though the sign outside the store isn't very eye-catching, then putting up a bigger and brighter sign should bring in even more customers.
I totally agree that section edit links are better for inexperienced users; that's why we want to make them more visible. It's our responsibility to help them find their way into the pants store; we can't have people out there just stumbling around naked. -- Danny@fandom (talk) 02:16, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Seems to me the best "sales pitch" for this hypothetically denuded consumer would be suntan lotion. --Calvin November t/c on 17:30, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
If this encourages more people to edit, then that is great. But what are we going to do to encourage them to move on and sign up for an account? Surely getting people to sign up is the ultimate goal and 'pretty buttons' that vanish when you sign up are going to disapoint anyone who enjoys having those big butttons. Essentially, to use your pants analogy (which is a bit weird if you are a Brit, because 'pants' means something else), you notice a guy likes to wear pants, sell him a few pairs of pants, but when he signs up to your storecard his pants vanish. I suggest you include an option to let people with accounts toggle this button on and off (and make the default for existing accounts be off, but the default for new accounts be on).
BTW: I actually use the section edit links myself, but my motivation is being too lazy to scroll, rather than being overwhelmed by the wikicode. For me a quick 'section edit' click, change and 'save page' click is faster to do that two sets of scrolling up and down a big page.
I think that the best 'reward' for setting up an account is for people to be able to maake edits without posting under their IP address. Maybe you should encourage newbies to set up accounts by allowing them to retro-activly 'buy off' all the edits with their IP address when they sign up. So how about a big 'newbie friendly message' on everyone's IP address talk page that tells them to create an account to 'convert the page to their user name page'? Put the two things together and I see a long term recruitment strategy for this 'edit' button. But if the button doesn't do more than help out drive by editors, I can't see it helping Wikia in the long term. David Shepheard 02:49, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
I like your ideas, David Shepheard. BTW, I think it looks kind of dumb to have only the first two headings, have this button. All of them should or none at all. WHLfan (talk to me!) 03:26, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
That could be an issue because IP's are not that static for some people and there could be people just going and clamming edits that simply are not theirs.
About the analogy can work both sides by simple facts
  1. if you see some one with only pants there is a business chance by selling a t-shirt.
  2. if you see some one with only pants there is a business chance that he will be more likely to buy more pants.
Now I like improvements some maybe good and some may be bad that will time tell, but what i dislike is this becoming Fisher-Price interface with big buttons and colors.
--Cizagna (Talk) 04:38, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Good Idea

That's actually a really good idea!

However, can you change these images if you prefer a theme, or want to get fancy? Not everyone is going to want a fat green oval... are these images alterable?

...come to think of it, that little person icon next to your user name, in the top-right corner, is that customizable per wiki?


Maybe you're using Momobook because in Monaco i dont have a « little perso icon » near username.
For customization of the button. See the CSS section in this page. — TulipVorlax 11:26, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

In order to change the "little person", add the follow to MediaWiki:Monobook.css:

/* User icon next to your username */
li#pt-userpage,	li#pt-anonuserpage, li#pt-login {
background: url(<insert url address of address of image here>) top left no-repeat;

I hope this helps. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 01:25, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

For logedin users

This is giving me a headache (almost).

The HTML output is the same for annon and logedin users. Here a snipset from fr.3d :

<h2><span class="editsection">[
<a href="/index.php?title=Wings_3D&action=edit&section=1" title="Modifier la section : 
Téléchargement" rel="nofollow">modifier</a>]</span> 
<span class="mw-headline">Téléchargement</span></h2>

But when i try to add the background image also for login users using this

a.bigButton big, a.bigButton small, h2 span.editsection {
   background: url( no-repeat;

I get the background for login users but i get it twice for annons. But i can't find the way so it would look the same (background is to wide; how the hell they make it auto sizing?).

As we can see, the CSS class used for the bigbutton are nowhere to be found when we look at the generated HTML. It seems that it use some other mean like JS or whatnot.

I can't solve this mystery alone. — TulipVorlax 13:06, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, they use JS to add a "style" attribute to the button. I had to mangle it because it breaks our edit links, because we have the edit links next to the headers, not floating to the left. --Ciencia Al Poder (talk) -WikiDex 17:25, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

allow section creation on Inputbox

In teh same vein, could you please upgrade the Inputbox extension to a version that allows creating a new section? This would allow us to invite users even better to leave a comment. --◄mendel► 09:49, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

This could be done using a simple link like that : Start new section on my talk page.
But maybe you want users to be able to type name of section before creating it ? — TulipVorlax 01:29, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Isn't that already available? As far as I know our version of InputBox was updated very recently. type=commenttitle appears to be part of the method of doing it? Kirkburn  talk  contr  @fandom  19:16, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
No, our version of InputBox is not the most recent. type=fulltext nor type=commenttitle are supported:

--Ciencia Al Poder (talk) -WikiDex 19:32, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
That's odd - we only updated a month ago (by my request!), and that appears to be older. I'll see what I can find out. Kirkburn  talk  contr  @fandom  15:32, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Fixed. -- Nef @fandom (talk) 18:15, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Not quite fixed; there's a problem (see Forum:Inputbox error‎). --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 18:37, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

lets see --Uberfuzzy@fandom 02:32, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.