Push For Natter Awareness

Show a little concern for the 99% of users who don't know what 'natter' means. :)

Natter is linked in the message isn't it?

Another idea: let's create one for when people add YMMVs to the main article.

Let's see how this one works out.

Good idea, but as everyone else said, a better name for it, and a better pm text, would help.

You are certainly welcome to make some sort of concrete suggestions.

This is too easy to abuse. I already got two PMs for removing things from an article. And since it's anonymous you can't reply to tell the person that's not what the button is for. Also the name makes no sense as mentioned.

edited 14th Mar '11 3:11:22 AM by Killomatic

How about just call the button "Natter warning". After all, Clear > witty.

For the mail text, something like this:

This is an automatic message, that another editor, like you, sent to warn about your earlier edit at [time, date] on the [article], that looks like Natter, a form of bad editing.

This is not an official warning, just a friendly reminder, that in case you missed the guideline written on the Natter page, and misunderstood how a good page is supposed to look like, well, this is your time.

If you see other people committing the same mistake, please use the "Natter warning" button in the page history, so they will also get this message.

Maybe there should be some kind of limit for how many of these you can receive within a certain time frame or for a given article, so they can't be spammed so easily. After all, anyone who is going to take the hint will do so after the first couple of PMs.

I already got one for adding moderator edits to a locked page. That's a bit odd, and off-putting. The message will become meaningless if it gets spammed all the time.

Considering its potential, there should be both a limiter for sending messages (eg.: a prompt or a captcha) and a limiter for receiving mesages (eg.: a daily resume of your natter edits instead of getting messaged for each one). We're supposed to do things harder for trolls anyway, if the whole quote button issue is any indication. Then as things get better we can drop one of the two (or even both).

edited 14th Mar '11 6:35:54 AM by SilentReverence

One summery message per day sounds good. Also, if possible, the button should disappear or become crossed out or something for an edit that has already been flagged.

Just now noticed that when there's an edit reason for the last post the box seems to be clashing with the link back to the main article in the top left corner.

What about a similar button but for grammar.As a warning. I am not a grammar prodigy. But I hate seeing people being banned for bad grammar and not for being mean or vandals.People who otherwise would be valuable members.

What about a message warning people before they get banned. And linking then to the get help with English thread and suggesting them using a text editor before posting.

edited 14th Mar '11 11:24:59 AM by FallenLegend

It shouldn't have been available to anons. That bug is fixed. The PM always has a "from" indicated, so we have a way to deal with abuse.

The present wording of the PM seems okay to me. The addition of a link to natter might have a helped a little.

Tweaked some layout issues, as well.

Oh wow.

This is a really step in the right direction.

Can you make it so that it only works once per edit? A new editor getting hit with a dozen automated messages for one edit might scare them away, rather than convince them to not natter anymore.

edited 14th Mar '11 1:22:26 PM by Deboss

Yes, some sort of restriction on how frequently a user receives natterfications seems like a good idea.

Or even one message for several consecutive edits to one article?

edited 14th Mar '11 2:03:50 PM by Killomatic

I agree that a limit and a confirmation screen would be a good idea. I got one sent to me by accident and I also realize the potential to spam someone with "natter" notifications–a captcha could deal with both of them pretty well, or alternately you could have a simple "confirm" screen and have a limit on the amount of times you can send a message per day. Or as a third option, you could be required to post what you consider natter into a message box before sending the automated message, so:

• Murder the Hypotenuse: Character X murders Character Y, because she is in love with Character Z and Character X wants Character Z.
  • Actually, it's arguable that Character X didn't actually murder Character Y, because Character Y was shot by someone offscreen and it hasn't been revealed yet whether the death was truly Character X's fault.

could be sent as:

[notification message]

The offending passage is as follows: "Actually, it's arguable that Character X didn't actually murder Character Y, because Character Y was shot by someone offscreen and it hasn't been revealed yet whether the death was truly Character X's fault."

This would force any would-be spammer to go through and enter in something, as well as making it very clear what was spam and what wasn't. And it would prevent misclicks, because the offending passage box would act as a confirm screen.

edited 15th Mar '11 2:36:21 PM by PulpoOscuro

^ As a similar idea, the button could appear next to each edit, rather than next to each editing session, and quote the offending edit in the message.

Either of these two will work.

Is the natter-fy button working well enough to implement the idea in post 28?

edited 28th Mar '11 11:02:35 PM by SpellBlade

Please?

Just click on their name in the edit history and PM them.