Page MenuHomePhabricator

Investigation: Should backlink numbering defaults be changed, eg. to alphabetic?
Open, Needs TriagePublic

Description

Many wikis seem to be overriding the default backlink numbering, to use "a" "b" instead of "1.1", "1.2". This is especially relevant at the moment because the default numbering will conflict with the current default subref numbering.

If wikis prefer alphabetic, maybe we can provide this as a default out of the box? Is there a safe migration path? Are there wikis where other alphabets are used?

Results

  • 89 wikis override the cite_references_link_many_format message to switch to the "alternate" backlink label which is normally an alphabetic sequence. These overrides always have the same content, and the only differences are italic or bold formatting, which could have been applied using CSS.
  • 59 wikis make the same override in CSS, for Parsoid/VE.
    • Some are making the same customization using other alphabets, for example ckbwiki uses the kurdish-alpha letters. For comparison, this wiki also includes the customization using messages.
  • Roughly 8 wikis are overriding the backlink marker to render two numbers like "1.2", and these cases seem to be designed to choose a specific set of digits or to customize the separator character.

Summary

  • It seems like the communities are leaning strongly towards alphabetic backlink characters which don't conflict with the primary ref numbering, so perhaps this should become the default?

Event Timeline

awight updated the task description. (Show Details)
awight updated the task description. (Show Details)
awight moved this task from Doing to UX/PM Review on the WMDE-TechWish-Sprint-2024-07-24 board.
awight updated the task description. (Show Details)

I also analyzed the cite_references_link_many_format message in T335129#9631804. I found that 85 Wikimedia wikis use the message to switch to the alternative, alphabetic backlink labels by replacing $2 with $3.

There are many more kinds of customizations. But I believe they are all either meaningless (notably the old <a><sup> order that should just be changed to <sup><a> everywhere, see T8906) or illegitimate (should be done with CSS instead).