James Heilman wrote:

And have created a mockup of what it would look like here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_failure

This isn't really a mock-up... it's probably best to use test.wikipedia.org or another dedicated test wiki for tests.

Wondering peoples opinions.

The mobile team somewhat recently added a similar strapline to the mobile site. You've seen https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_failure? It currently changes colors based on the last time the page was modified and it includes the username of the most recent editor.

I think the current mobile implementation is bad because it sends misleading or inaccurate messages to users:

* articles are intentionally unsigned and without an owner, so putting a single username at the top of an article isn't really appropriate;

* the color cues (green if the page was recently edited, grey if the page hasn't been recently edited) give the impression that recent page activity is more important than making quality edits; and

* the "last edited" time may or may not be the last time the page was truly edited (consider page protection, vandalism followed by a reversion, etc.).

I think we're prominently sending the wrong messages to users on the mobile site and I'm not really interested in doing the same on desktop. A simple "authors" link, as you've proposed, might be more palatable. Though I don't imagine linking to tools.wmflabs.org from every article would be feasible due to server load, unless appropriately planned for. And we probably don't want users bouncing to another domain in any case. We already have https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_failure?action=info linked from the sidebar. Bolstering the content of this info page and making the link to it more prominent would probably be better uses of time.

MZMcBride