Re: [WikiEN-l] Expanded Use of Article Feedback Tool
On 9 May 2011 04:38, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: Given that it is still broken in the classic skin how about no. I suspect that the remaining users of the classic skin do not constitute an obvious and overwhelming veto. I also suspect that anyone that interested in the classic skin is going to have to submit patches themselves. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Expanded Use of Article Feedback Tool
On 9 May 2011 08:19, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 9 May 2011 04:38, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
Given that it is still broken in the classic skin how about no.
I suspect that the remaining users of the classic skin do not
constitute an obvious and overwhelming veto.
I also suspect that anyone that interested in the classic skin is
going to have to submit patches themselves.
I'm sure somewhere in their $20.4 million budget the WMF can afford an
off switch. I'm an editor. I do not need articles served with what is
from my POV a pointless ratings box. If I'm rating an article I'm
using the tried and tested {{NPOV}},{{Wikify}}
and{{ThisArticleHasWorseFactCheckingThanTheRelatedCrackedArticle}}
(Jasper Maskelyne).
That it keeps the classic skin usable should be viewed as a bonus. And
it is a bonus since having editors on a range of skins means that
certain CSS and social engineering attacks don't work as well they
otherwise might. It also mildly increases the chance of wikipedians
using mediawiki markup code in ways that isn't utterly skin dependent
(although strangely we still get a fair number of consecutive links
which works in classic which underlines links but doesn't work so well
in vector which doesn't).
--
geni
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Expanded Use of Article Feedback Tool
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 5:19 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: I suspect that the remaining users of the classic skin do not constitute an obvious and overwhelming veto. I also suspect that anyone that interested in the classic skin is going to have to submit patches themselves. Since the official [foundation] standard is 1% before they get axed for web browser support, I believe skin usage should be considered the same in regards to its supportedness. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Expanded Use of Article Feedback Tool
On 9 May 2011 09:56, K. Peachey p858sn...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 5:19 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: I suspect that the remaining users of the classic skin do not constitute an obvious and overwhelming veto. I also suspect that anyone that interested in the classic skin is going to have to submit patches themselves. Since the official [foundation] standard is 1% before they get axed for web browser support, I believe skin usage should be considered the same in regards to its supportedness. That's roughly what I said. Functionality in Classic was getting flaky *years* ago, which is why I moved to Monobook (and am now very happy with Vector). Of course, that's no reason to *refuse* patches for little-used skins or browsers. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[WikiEN-l] Expanded Use of Article Feedback Tool
Hello all, This is a heads-up that tomorrow, we're planning to deploy the Article Feedback Tool, which is currently on 3,000 English Wikipedia articles, to a larger set of 100,000 articles. This initial expansion is intended to further assess both the value and the performance characteristics of the feature with an eye to a full deployment. As always, we may postpone the deployment if we run into unanticipated production issues. Some examples of articles that currently have the tool (at the bottom of the article): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grassroots_lobbying http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Constitution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_cuisine The intent of the tool is two-fold: - to gain aggregate quality assessments of Wikimedia content by readers and editors; - to use it as an entry vector for other forms of engagement. To assess its value in both categories, we've undertaken a significant amount of qualitative and quantitative research already. You can read an extensive summary of our work so far here: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Article_feedback The headline summary is that based on the data we've seen so far, we do believe that user ratings can be a valuable way to predict high and low quality content in Wikimedia, and we're especially interested in engaging raters beyond the initial act of assessing an article. We've seen very good conversion rates on the calls-to-action that follow a rating which we've trialed so far, suggesting that this could be a very powerful engagement tool as well. Beyond our own research and these engagement experiments, our goal is to make anonymized data from the tool available regularly, and to also give editors a dashboard tool that they can use to surface trends in the rating data. Please use the talk page for comments, questions and suggestions. We'll also set up an IRC office hour soon to talk more about the tool. All best, Erik -- Erik Möller Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Expanded Use of Article Feedback Tool
On 9 May 2011 03:57, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hello all, This is a heads-up that tomorrow, we're planning to deploy the Article Feedback Tool, which is currently on 3,000 English Wikipedia articles, to a larger set of 100,000 articles. This initial expansion is intended to further assess both the value and the performance characteristics of the feature with an eye to a full deployment. As always, we may postpone the deployment if we run into unanticipated production issues. Some examples of articles that currently have the tool (at the bottom of the article): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grassroots_lobbying http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Constitution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_cuisine The intent of the tool is two-fold: - to gain aggregate quality assessments of Wikimedia content by readers and editors; - to use it as an entry vector for other forms of engagement. To assess its value in both categories, we've undertaken a significant amount of qualitative and quantitative research already. You can read an extensive summary of our work so far here: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Article_feedback The headline summary is that based on the data we've seen so far, we do believe that user ratings can be a valuable way to predict high and low quality content in Wikimedia, and we're especially interested in engaging raters beyond the initial act of assessing an article. We've seen very good conversion rates on the calls-to-action that follow a rating which we've trialed so far, suggesting that this could be a very powerful engagement tool as well. Beyond our own research and these engagement experiments, our goal is to make anonymized data from the tool available regularly, and to also give editors a dashboard tool that they can use to surface trends in the rating data. Please use the talk page for comments, questions and suggestions. We'll also set up an IRC office hour soon to talk more about the tool. All best, Erik Given that it is still broken in the classic skin how about no. -- geni ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
