771db3500021 In my experience, it's a short time and the ticket has a small number of votes. The chances are very small

Hey there Is there any chance to get this function in the future? To be undone since 2011 seems not so, i guess ^^ Thanks Rouven 

This would make things so much easier for us, some of our groups are VERY large, and it is TEDIOUS to have to mention 40+ users on pages, it is also looks terrible on the page. Suggesting we add them as Watchers is just as bad, again it's tedious time consuming work for medium size organizations where they may have to communicate updates to entire departments. Dummy accounts aren't a good solution as you are requiring us to use one of OUR seats to address an out of the box function that seems pretty logical to have available.

Further, requesting that we purchase an APP to resolve this is no better. There are a lot of great features within Atlassian tools, but it is constantly concerning that simple functionality is pushed off for features that aren't necessary. Instead of the new Whiteboard function I would have been happy with the dozens of issues that we all wish were addressed.

Appreciate you Atlassian, but it would be great to see the organization prioritize at the minimum at least one Quarter to JUST low hanging fruit like this for your long time users.

Our App "GroupMentions" could help to solve the problem, check it out:

GroupMentions for Atlassian Confluence
https://marketplace.atlassian.com/1224901

Demo Video on YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/@brutscher-it

See all Apps 
https://marketplace.atlassian.com/vendors/1219050/it-beratung-dirk-brutscher

Funny enough Confluence cloud has this feature while lacking many others  

I have never seen a company with so little respect for the user base that keeps them in business. They feel they are too big to fail but as many others who thought that found out, there is always someone who will come and knock you down and by then it is too late to suddenly give a damn because now it affects you not the users.

@Ian Godfrey - I'm pretty sure that you can stop telling arguments to Atlassian. They succesfully ignored this FR over 10 !!! years. They still dont give a fxxx what their customers need.

I'm still thinking whats the job/skill of Jenny Millman - the so called "Product Manager" – blind, deaf and dumb and highly experience at ignoring people... .

They just wait - as they did here - for people like Dirk, who solve this problem. So they got a win-win-win situation. The problem is solved, they dont do anything AND they get their piece of the cake for every licence Dirk sells... thats customer orientation at his best.

The reason why this feature is required, is because the owner of a page is a group of people, who the reader doesn't know. The author of the page or the last person to modify it may no longer exist, so who would they contact?

The server version is now available too:

GroupMentions for Atlassian Confluence
https://marketplace.atlassian.com/1224901

See all Apps 
https://marketplace.atlassian.com/vendors/1219050/it-beratung-dirk-brutscher

Our new App "GroupMentions" could help to solve the problem,
the DataCenter version is listed on the Atlassian MarketPlace since 04/26/2021,
the Server version will follow in the next days (approval pending), check it out:

GroupMentions for Atlassian Confluence
https://marketplace.atlassian.com/1224901

See all Apps 
https://marketplace.atlassian.com/vendors/1219050/it-beratung-dirk-brutscher

This would be really handy functionality. In Microsoft Teams, I regularly @ a whole group of users. It's a speedy way to make sure I am alerting all concerned parties. 

@Atlassian What's so difficult with such low hanging fruits    

Completely agree with Laurence. Albeit I've used this workaround before, this is not a proper solution. We would really appreciate the functionality added.

Hello,

I would like to mention that the provided workaround "Create a new 'dummy' user, with the username and email address relating to the group" takes 1 licence by created group.

In our organisation, we could have the need for many groups, then it could take a lot of licences, then the workaround is not acceptable.

Thanks.

Hello,

we would need this feature to be able to

• adress /report a task to / of a whole team at glance instead of writing each team member
• adress a page comment to a whole team instead of writing each team member
• to set an event in team calendar to a whole team instead of writing each team member

Thanks

In tasks, I'd like to use @mention with groups (for exemple teams or roles)  so I'll be able to have task reports for groups.

Here at Siemens Energy we are hosting several instaces of Jira server and I absolutely cannot understand why this feature is not implemented when it is requested so badly by your customers!! 

Why would you differentiate between Cloud or Server users. You are still earning money with both of them!!

Well this is never going to happen and I am sick of seeing comments get added with no movement. Unsubscribing from this feature.

@jim weaver, it would be useful when you generate documentation based on a deployment to @mention teams so that they can see the documentation

From Atlassian's documentation on Atlassian Cloud Teams (who can be mentioned):

"Team mentions and shares make it simple for you to keep everyone in the loop. To keep the right teams informed on a decision you’re making, or just keep track of attendees in meeting notes, just @mention a Team on any Confluence page or comment."

From their official comment on this request:

"We're interested in understanding further why you want to mention groups on a page as opposed to sharing the page with them. "

the need for group mention is for tasks in confluence is high. There are things that the whole group needs to participate in and having to mention each person in a 40 person group is time consuming.  

So interesting to see that feature in cloud, I hope in short time it will be on server release

@martin.krimpelbein, during years of usage Jira we have gathered plenty of issues which bothered us - unfortunately, you can find them in a "swamp of desired (high voted) old issues" - five years ago we migrated and we are more than satisfied. It was obvious that a loss of 100 users is not even noticeable for Atlassian.

Works great on cloud. Cloud always seems to have the latest goodies.

Implementing high demanded features seems not be the focus of atlassian....

ok 12 months passes now so I urge you to consider implementing such a 'feature'  

Currently sitting at a meeting where someone is typing the name of each group member and trying not to to forget anyone. This feature seems useful. Here's hoping it'll be given consideration.

Crikey, I ended up here after making a wild assumption that mentioning groups would definitely be in Confluence as such a fundamental feature. Very disappointing to see that not only is it not included, but Atlassian don't see it important enough for consideration. 

Maybe we need to launch a Change.org campaign for this to be considered....?

Yea have given up on this and a few other suggestions we were "waiting" for as each one has had suggested work around by burning licences. Sorry but they (licences) are too damn expensive to waste on anything other than a "real" user.

A very disappointing response and my thoughts and feelings echo the others that have responded. 8 years since it was posted, many votes, comments and watchers, and I'm sure there are more.

I previously worked at a company where we had a group of Power Beta Users who were real customers who worked closely with us to develop our software. Atlassian should consider this. As with others, having dummy users wouldn't help as there would be various combinations of users and groups, it would consume licenses and just be hard to remember which group was for who. It's possible the Share feature could be used if there was a Share Inbox/Outbox with historical shares.

The "work around" is to burn a licensed user?!?!?!?!  
That is so wrong.

Hi Jenny,

You can't say "we fully appreciate that this feature is important to many of you" and then say "this isn't something we'll be looking at developing within the next 12 months". If you fully appreciated how important it is then you'd be developing it. If the people behind Bandage can put something together, Atlassian can. As the Senior Product Manager, can you tell us why the votes of your users aren't a factor when you prioritise your teams' backlogs?

You'd get more respect if you were honest about your business approach: Atlassian are only developing enhancements/fixes that their largest customers have requested, and user requests/votes carry no weight with you.

I'd like to add to Richard's point why mentioning of groups is easiert than mentioning single users. And please feel free to correct me in any points.

In our current setup, we have groups of roughly 10 users in each group on a team level. Then we have a department group (i.e. IT) where up to 30 users are in each group. And then we have groups summarising different groups, company group for instance, which will have in the future probably more than 100 users in them.

If we create a meeting minutes document and want to notify each user from our IT that we have created it and they should read or contribute (also for any other document), we would have to mention every single user by their name. We're all human, users might be missed out, because listing down 30+ users is a task in and by itself. Or there might be an interesting document, I'd like to share with my team - I have to go and mention every single one of them, instead of mentioning my team's name and they would be notified all the same, as if I had mentioned every single one of them.

So in conclusion, we expect that there is a solution in place where we do not have to mention every single user (@Simone, @Bob, @Tom, @Melanie, etc.) BUT only mention the group's name where all those users are included (@Simone's Team, @IT, @Support, @Admins, @Company X Users, etc.). 

Of course in the background this should be setup by an admin, so that there ARE groups including repective users, and people are aware of how the groups are made up. In a usual setup you'd have groups for teams, departments, scrums, you name it.

I hope, this clarifies a bit better on what our expectations are.

@Ulrich Huber - Exactly the same situation for us, in fact our accounts and groups are generated from our Active Directory automatically which means we have centralised administration and matching email / confluence groups.

@Jenny - "We're interested in understanding further why you want to mention groups on a page as opposed to sharing the page with them"

- For exactly the same reason that you use @mentions elsewhere rather than writing someone's name in one place and then sharing the page with them afterwards:
* more work
* error prone (esp when busy can forget the extra step)
* autocomplete 
* the info in the email is different
* the subtle level of message is different "you are named in this page" vs "you may be interested".
* Searching
* automatic replacement when name alias is changed

There's probably more... 

@Jenny  - Many of us are interested in understanding further why you have not implemented this yet despite all the requests, votes and comments.

Jenny the way with Dummy users isn´t the way which will help us.

We got round about 100 Teams which are grouped with the group feature correctly. Now we should create 100 similar users to make a group mention able? That will cost us 100 user licenses - do you wanna create more money for Atlassian by licensing?! By the way that won´t be a workaround which is acceptable for my customers too,

It´s more bug than a feature in Confluence. 

Actually in a team protocol I have to mention 10 users if I want to reach the team. If I create a task for the whole team only the first user is shown in the task list.

Aaaand once again Atlassian passes the buck to an add-on (which is only available to Cloud). More reason for me to find an alternative.
 

The owners of atlassian now own the two most expensive house in Australia, why would they care that we spend hours every week tagging people one at a time because they can't be bothered to prioritise something that a Russian hacker was able to knock up in an afternoon? Your voice and vote means nothing to these people but you'll continue to use confluence because the alternatives are even worse! @confluence-users

And it is the number one top voted issue in this bugtracker. So why ignoring the customers?

I'm also really disappointed. This issue is 7 years old and yet, absolutely nothing has happened. At this rate of progress, there's not much one can expect.

Hello Jenny Millman,
your "workarounds" are installing a 3rd party plugin (fee based) or creating a lot of users with duplicate data (email addresses). This is very unprofessional..
I'm disappointed.

John's comment above is exactly my vision of group mentions as well, plus we should be able to see who is still missing from completing the task too. Also, if we mention the group, everyone within the group should receive a notification.

I would love the ability to call group attention to a specific part of a confluence document. We use this extensively now for specific points in technical documentation and I need to @mention everyone individually. A group method would be great. Also, we need the ability for each member that is mentioned to be able to "Resolve" the issue without the highlighted text disappearing. Each member could then could click "resolve" on the highlighted portion and it would then disappear from view once the last person clicked "resolve". 

When we have pages where we credit the accomplishment of a team, I'd like to @mention the team.

I want to be able to assign a 'team action' in meeting notes, without having to type everyone's name individually

We want to draw a group of people's attention to a specific part of the page/comment.

Same here, I have that need too - the ability to create an internal Virtual User, that users can tag, that then notifies internal actual users.

To answer question posed in the Description, We are a large university where there is no standardization on chat or offline communication. As as result we using Jira and Confliuence comment threads to keep non-face to face communication organized. If email responses to shared page notifications or comment notifications would be appended to page as a comment (like JIRA) instead of being bounced back to email replier we would use share page functionality more. For now to keep things simple and logical for team members with varying degrees of Confluence experience, so we try to only use Comment functionality. When you share a page, the comment you include with shared page does not get appended to page, so if you ask a question about page for others to respond to and they opened page up to make a comment, their replies in the comments section would have minimal context and could look out of place. 

we would need this feature too, the workaround with the dummy user is no option for us

we got more than 100 groups, this would meen that I need 100 licenses only for dummy users

I agree with Jason and Tobias, this would be great for assigning tasks, too. In this case tasks should be assigned to all users of that group at the time of assignment in my opinion

This feature isn't just about drawing attention to a page or notifying people. @Groups would be great for tasks as well, so you can delegate them to a group of people (for example, it admins or a working group in a project). It would be even more amazing if those then showed up in the personal task list of the people in the group based on their membership.

I am looking to use @mention for to do assignments and initiating the email notification.  The workaround for email notifications I've recently found is groups work with the Share page function.  Con - it is another step to take after publishing a page in order to initiate a notification.  Pro - a short message can be added to summarize why the page is being shared.  

I would like to use mentions for groups in Addons such as the the Microblog. It would be great to be able to address a microblog post (sometimes also a page or blog comment) to a user group. Cannot be so difficult?

@Peter Bunde Hansen I agree with @Davin Studer and respectfully disagree with you. It is impractical to expect people to visit Confluence on a regular basis and check whether anything has changed, and whether the things that have changed affect them, especially if your instance has thousands of pages and hundreds of labels. That is a "pull" - the user has to find the information and pull it towards them. @mentions provide "push" notifications, which allow users to focus on the changes that are important to them. A process that includes auto-generated notifications is not "a poor way", it is in fact quite the opposite - a good way.

I do not even want to send e-mails for groups, but I want to assigns tasks to groups.

Now I have to assign them to users and if someone is not longer responsible for a domain it gets messy.

@Peter Bundle Hansen I don't believe that notification through email is a poor practice. What is email for if not to notify people? Email is the single best way to keep users notified. I would also disagree that @mentioing is a workflow process. It is a form of notification. Also, I wouldn't say that @mentioning groups turns Confluence into an "email generating machine".  Do you have the same view about watches, @mentioning users, daily digest? Those are all emails and are simply ways to notify the user of activity.

@Davis Studer Sending emails is a poor way of managing a process in a tool. Confluence as an email generating machine is the wrong direction to go.

@Peter Bundle Hansen I respectfully disagree with you on this as I would assume most who are commenting on this topic would as well. When I @mention someone I understand that they will receive an email and will get a notification in their Confluence inbox ... I want that ... especially with groups. Tagging does not achieve either of those. It does not tell the user "hey, you were mentioned", but rather requires the user to go and see if the labels they are interested in were used. Not only that it would require the user to remember the previous states of their label reports to know if anything is new in the list.

@Dirk Randhahn

Yes, basically tagging is a better and more elegant way to manage things. Mentioning is a more clumbsy way - so much more so when we are talking a whole group. This suggestion is basically trying to create some sort of workflow out of mentioning; I think that is the wrong way. We use mentioning as little as possible. We only use it in the comments, an then for one person only. I believe this suggestion will make things worse not better.

@Peter Bunde Hansen, this would also make user mentions useless, right? You could use tags, too.

I believe tagging is a much better way to indicate what a page is about and why certain people should pay attention to it.

@Martin Marcher, your users don't see a difference, ours do. When you share the page, you say "hey, there is a page worth looking", when you're mentioning guys in comment you say "hey, there is a comment which probably needs your attention". Mentioning will inform user each single time they are mentioned.

Sharing a page with a group and mentioning a group in comments/text is absolutely different functionality

Respectfully, I disagree.

If someone is @ mentioned people, unfortunately there are no groups one could mention! , expect them to just be able to click the link and see the contents. At least that is what our people expect and it is a constant source of confusion. Our users just don't see the difference.

I totally agree with the others. Our dev team is over 80 people. How on earth are we supposed to mention each one in a comment? 

...as a big focus for the team will instead be on improving our search functionality.

Why? What's wrong with the search? Are people complaining about that because it seems totally fine to me?

We're interested in understanding further why you want to mention groups on a page as opposed to sharing the page with them.

Or do you want to draw a group of people's attention to a specific part of the page?

I really can't believe that this is something worth discussing (but that's nothing compared to the fact that this suggestion is actually over 6 years old and not yet resolved). The advantages are quite obvious and I mean, this is a collaboration and to some extent a communication platform, who doesn't want to save the time and effort of remembering all persons involved in certain groups? I hope this gets implemented soon - I'm no programmer, but I can't imagine that this would be too much effort with respect to the overall functionality of Confluence.

It would be very much appreciated!

It's really odd that this simple feature takes so long, especially when we're talking about a collaboration tool.

For me its enough. After 6 years and having read Jenny's post on behalf of Atlassian I've just stopped watching this thread.

Sharing a page with a group and mentioning a group in comments/text is absolutely different functionality.

I could ask a similar question to you: why would you create a feature to mention someone if you could just share a page with them?

Is it not enough that users expect it to work this way and are disappointed that it does not?

Thanks martin47, I do indeed see the difference  It's really useful for us to understand the exact reasons behind a feature request so we can ensure we're implementing the right improvements.

We're interested in understanding further why you want to mention groups on a page as opposed to sharing the page with them. Is it that you want a record of who the page has been shared with?

Audit purposes would be great and I can definitely see an advantage in having that visible directly in the page but it is not my main concern.

Or do you want to draw a group of people's attention to a specific part of the page?

Yes definitely.

I want to e.g. make a new documentation page available to people and, since I am a human, I make mistakes and forget things. I know that I work with groups (e.g.) HPC, Research, Marketing. Each group has approx 8-12 people.

I don't want to to forget anyone. People might have changed groups and aren't interested anymore or shouldn't see this anymore, so by having to deal with less information that I need to remember this would really help me.

Also a very important aspect: I'm lazy, extremely lazy. So I don't see the point in typing:

• alice, bob, charlie, dave, emma, francis, gerald, hector, iris, jill, kira, lou, michael, nicole, otto, peter, quinn, richard, steve, ulysses, victor, wilma, xavier, yanis, zach

Much ratcher I'd ike:

• HPC, Research, Marketing

Do you see the difference @jmilman?

Create a technical user which has  a mailing list in its user address. Then any@menition is forwarded to the group. We are using users "GROUP: Internal" and "GROUP: Customer" to share infos with everyone in this user group. 

Care to also explain what the workaround is?

I'd be happy if I could use it...

Hello Warren,

there is an easy workaround available and thats possibly why more important issues are done first. 

Best regards

Philipp

Because of the arrogance of the Atlassian PMs.

They know better than we do what is good for us.

They have said "no" to this multiple times. It is not hard, it is just wrong for us to want it.

This is the second most voted issue for Confluence and after 6 years is still open?  Why is it so hard to implement this feature?

Agreed! Please don't just put it into an add-on (usable for only one browser so far), but rather into Confluence itself, so that it is usable for both browser and mobile devices.

We need this as well. Please consider adding features like this, to make Confluence more Enterprise-friendly!

We added support for this kind of behavior in our new add-on https://marketplace.atlassian.com/plugins/bandage-conf/cloud/overview
It's not possible to do the actual group mention, but we mention every individual from the group for you and wrap it all in an expand macro.

@individual is so natural to notify someone.  Why @group to notify a group, is not enabled is disappointing.  From reading the comments it certainly is something many people have asked for, albeit in slightly different ways.

Dear @mseager

We pay for a license based on the number of users (really should have a level between 500 and 2000 users license). If the users are in the system using crowd and I manage my users access to projects using groups and surely JIRA knows what User Groups are then why wouldn't JIRA/Confluence recognize those same groups when you attempt to mention them or assign issues to them. Yes, I know that there are plugins. I can write a script. I can use an issue field with a notification based on the group in that field (which seems a little redundant that the assignee would get two email if they are also in said group. You also restrict me from updating the assignee field to a group. Why though should I be forced to use a license to add an AD group.

Hi @rkleinschmidt,

we are using a workaround for years now which is actually working great. Just add one user (with the name of the group) per group into your AD and add a group e-mail address as that users e-mail address. Then you actually have the functionality you desire for the cost of a few user licenses used. 

Best Regards from Munich

Philipp

The Atlassian gods have spoken. How dare we disagree!!! They do not intend to ever provide this feature. They know better than all of us how to run our businesses. You are wasting your time commenting on this thread and you should not wait for it to be implemented.

Robert Kleinschmidt

VP Engineering

Intacct

I'm also looking forward to this feature. Sadly, no progress has been made since 2011 and no update either.

Want, need this asap.

thx

Hi Patrick - this does not work in our Cloud version of JIRA. I actually have a JIRA user that is a team email distribution list. My thought was exactly that - mention this user and the entire DL gets notified. It does not happen so (or at least did not happen a few months ago).

A work around for team groups: create an email account that forwards mail to all team members. Create in Confluence a user with that email address: when you mention this user, all team members will be notified.

This feature would be very helpful. I'm constantly having to @mention every person in my team as we frequently collaborate around Confluence pages. Could the email notification not just go out to the individual group members email address? 

This would be really helpful rather than tagging in the names of a whole team, look forward to this being added soon

We need this urgently as well.

This would be great in Confluence. We have groups that each have different capabilities and resonsibilities and would like to be able to notify them of at once since there are over 100 in a group.

Hi guys. This will be a great addition, esp. since we have retrospective templates (and other recurring meetings) where the attendees are listed. Currently, this means @mentioning each individual team member for every single retrospective (and other meetings) to minute these. We had to appoint a permanent admin employee to manage all of this, which I think is a little ridiculous.