@WikiBayer: I'd suggest making a more comprehensive description of the problem. What problem does it solve (in terms of the article writing process), how many people/how regularly have people asked for this functionality ? I mean.. my first idea would be.. use the notepad functionality of your computer.. It's easy, its there, you are already familiar with it. As we shouldn't cram the functionality of an entire operating system inside MediaWiki if we can avoid it, why would it be so much better to have it in the MediaWiki software that it would eleviate the burden of making and keeping such basic functionality provided by so many other pre-existing and focused systems ? —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 21:19, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Alternative software is always more cumbersome than a function in the Mediawiki. Appropriate programs are required on all PCs/Smartphones. A "interview" by WMF with CheckUsers has also shown that they keep making alternative notes.---𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫👤💬08:13, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiBayer: We'd like some more details about what sort of connections or features these Private Notes would have? Is the desire here to be able to use Wikitext? Link to wiki articles? Do sandbox development in private? We'd like to see the specific use cases be at the heart of the proposal so that it's clearer, more specific, and easier for voters to understand (and support). --AEzell (WMF) (talk) 23:21, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@User:AEzell (WMF) The proposal is intended as a pure administrative aid and organizational aid. It is only intended to enable you to take notes and to format them minimally so that longer notes remain clear and can be navigated quickly. It should be possible to create Links to Wiki Articles and write in bold and italic.--𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫👤💬08:49, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose having to host content that the community is not able to moderate. No objections to plugins/app features that would store these client-side. — xaosfluxTalk02:30, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. I can imagine some usecases, but there might be some privacy problems. Who can access these notes? When only editor, it will be great feature for spammers etc. (invisible sandbox). When also admins, it will be not really private and what about storing some critical infos like password? Yes. some type of notes would be useful, but I am afraid, this one would have more problems than pluses. JAn Dudík (talk) 08:39, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for private notes one has: e-mail, chats, private websites etcetera; wikis are not developed to support such gadgets, Klaas `Z4␟` V: 16:09, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It is doubtful en: I did not completely understand. However, I fear that something like this could be unreliable and difficult to maintain. / de: Ich habe es nicht vollständig verstanden. Ich befürchte jedoch, dass so etwas unzuverlässig und schwer zu warten sein könnte. --Dirk123456 (talk) 10:16, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I fail to understand how that will be useful to anyone MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 19:44, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Support thinking of something like private margin notes... useful for reading and later editing. Ponor (talk) 22:13, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Strong oppose having to host content that the community is not able to moderate. No objections to plugins/app features that would store these client-side. — xaosflux Talk 02:30, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
Weak support The proposed changes to watchlists (adding notes to pages when adding them to watchlist) could cover this use case // Lollipoplollipoplollipop :: talk 05:36, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Oppose no good clarifications as why this is useful. Em-mustapha User | talk 07:14, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
It is doubtful I do not think we should offer private content hosting. --WTM (talk) 01:07, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
