Removing "Copy Page Tree" section from pages

[Charisma Riley]

I cannot tell you how much I detest the "Copy Page Tree" information at the top of our pages. There absolutely MUST be a way to remove it. Can anyone tell me how? This is what it looks like on the upper left of the page:

It's hideous. And meaningless. Please help me remove it, if you know how! Thank you!

[Shannon S · Accepted solution]

Hi Charisma,

The Copy Page Tree text is actually the name of the user who created the page. Here's an example from my instance after I modified a page that I did not create:

I suspect you might have used an add-on such as Copy Page Tree to create the page you are looking at, and it's likely that this add-on has created a user called Copy Page Tree in order to create the pages.

It is not possible to hide author information in Confluence Cloud, but be advised we do have a feature request for it:

• CONFCLOUD-57458 Provide a way to hide author and last modified information

Please feel free to vote on that request and comment there with your feedback. It will help to consider it for future releases.

Kind regards,

Shannon

[Charisma Riley]

Thank you, Shannon. That is not the answer I wanted, but I understand it is what it is. I will check out that link.

[Charisma Riley]

Shannon, as it turns out, we also have all these users who are no longer even with us! Yet there names show up on every page they every created and lots of times these people didn't even leave on good terms and seeing their names can be upsetting. I'm unsure why we can't even have an option to update this field manually and to hide it if we want to. The ridiculously tiny amount of customization that Atlassian is slowly removing from Confluence--unless you buy a macro!--is very upsetting. free third-party tools offer more functionality and I cannot for my life understand why Atlassian wants to head this direction with their Cloud product?? the whole cloud thing has become this box that NO ONE MAY TOUCH. Yet server (the SAME PRODUCT) if installed on another hosting platform, has limitless options. Atlassian is determining for everyone what the "best wiki experience" looks like--that's what got Microsoft in Windows 8 and in Windows XP. If you don't start taking into account your customers and their need to stand out even on the Intranets, then you do not understand web=-based technologies and why they are so compelling. Documentation *can* LOOK GREAT and be CUSTOMIZED without anyone dying. Also, people enjoy seeing themselves in their documentation, in the personality they've created. You guys have missed the point entirely on what people want in a modern wiki community. I know it's not you that determines this; i am just venting. I have hit wall after wall about customizing this product and I am highly confused why--in this day and age--Atlassian has gone BACKWARDS in what people can do in a limitless environment. And yet, the capabilities exist--IF you buy them. Cloud users cannot use open source options. And making our own Connect tools is not an immediate process. this whole thing has become silly and too complicated. There should be HTML, JavaScript, and CSS. STANDARD. The web is the web; people need to sign a disclaimer that they realize their mileage may vary based on how the customize the product and that you guys are not liable.  And if that's the issue--that you're afraid people will break their installations and you'll be held liable--then I get it and I think many others will also understand. Even so, the way Atlassian is going about it and positioning their products rn, as though they know best for us and KNOW ALL THE THINGS about what *we* need to make "great documentation," comes off as presumptive and insulting. ESPECIALLY since all of that same functionality is still available--IF you buy it or build it yourself in a fully-fledged programming language (which not many people can or want to do, either). I would appreciate it if you would pass along this feedback. I don't know if I can be any more open and honest about how people feel when it comes to customizing their Atlassian products--ESPECIALLY Confluence. It's our *home* you know, where all of our information sits. We want to decorate it ourselves. It's unfair to remove that option from Atlassian-hosted server "cloud" products.

[Daniel Eads]

Hey Charisma,

I'm looking at your question about editing source code so you'll see me again in a few minutes. The answer on that question varied between Cloud/Server so I came back on your previous questions to see what deployment you have.

You're very passionate about Confluence and that's awesome - in a former role I was a Jira and Confluence administrator and used the products all day. That's a big reason why I joined Atlassian. The products have a lot of power behind them and we rely on them to get work done. And I like to think that they can be fun to use too, that's why we see a lot of people using them for projects around their homes!

From your Community profile I can see you're doing a great job asking questions separately, so I won't go over how breaking those apart helps us get the right answers posted faster. I'll just try and provide some comments on items you mentioned:

1. User's names listed on pages - Confluence has always displayed the name of the page creator and the last editor. What's changed more recently is displaying that more prominently/with a user profile photo.
2. Cloud customization - This is a large subject but Atlassian's research has shown that the majority of users choosing Cloud want to get up and running quickly without needing to do a lot of setup or administration. A side-effect of making that simple for as many people as possible is that some features/customizations available on Server won't be available on Cloud. Personally, I sometimes feel that I've been spoiled as a Server administrator because of all the options available. If I hadn't already used a feature in Server, I might not even know I needed it. Cloud is continuously changing however, and everyone is empowered to create a feature request on jira.atlassian.com if they would like something added.
3. More Cloud plugins are Paid than Server - Just did a quick lookup on Marketplace - actually a little over half of the Cloud plugins are free, while only 46% of Server plugins (as of right now) are free. That's opposite what I was expecting too :)
4. HTML/CSS/Javascript - If I read your comments right, this mostly centers around having control over what's on the page. Because Cloud isn't a single-instance server (and "available" to everyone on the internet in the sense that they can type your Confluence address and have it resolve), there are security issues with allowing everyone to add Javascript and other customizations everywhere. In Cloud, it's also Atlassian's responsibility to make sure your instance is up and running 24/7 which is an impossible feat if people are able to add site-breaking code.
5. Other Cloud concerns - I do hear you and wonder if Server might be more suited to your needs. Especially as you are a technical writer, I understand the extra control around look&feel and features would be extremely helpful. If this is something your company feels like they want to explore, we can get you in touch with resources at Atlassian that can work through your specific needs.

Thanks,
Daniel