Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand

[Tim Landscheidt]

Ruslan Takayev  wrote:

> Wikiwand states: "Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license"

> WMF projects are available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 license.

> Correct me if I am wrong, but these licenses are not interchangeable and
> therefore the entire Wikiwand site is a copyright violation?

> […]

You can incorporate content licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 in
CC-BY-SA 4.0 works;
cf. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode,
"4. Restrictions", b).  You cannot go the other way.

Tim


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand

[James Heilman]

From what I understand we are moving to the CC BY-SA 4.0 license ourselves
eventually.

I have been in discussions with the World Health Organization for the last
few years about them licensing more stuff under a CC BY SA license.

The original road block was that the 3.0 license tied them to a national
jurisdiction while their set up does not allow this. The 4.0 license was
designed to address this.

I am hoping to meet with WHO again this fall so hopefully we will have
moved by than. Stephen is there a timeline for this?

James

On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 5:49 AM, Ruslan Takayev 
wrote:

> Wikiwand states: "Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license"
>
> WMF projects are available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 license.
>
> Correct me if I am wrong, but these licenses are not interchangeable and
> therefore the entire Wikiwand site is a copyright violation?
>
> Warm regards,
>
> Ruslan Takayev
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 2:39 PM, Anders Wennersten <
> m...@anderswennersten.se
> > wrote:
>
> > What is WMFs position on Wikiwand [1]?
> >
> > is it a complement or a commercial run interface that is  better that we
> > can offer?
> >
> > Anders
> >
> > [1] http://www.wikiwand.com/about
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 




-- 
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand

[Ruslan Takayev]

Wikiwand states: "Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license"

WMF projects are available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 license.

Correct me if I am wrong, but these licenses are not interchangeable and
therefore the entire Wikiwand site is a copyright violation?

Warm regards,

Ruslan Takayev



On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 2:39 PM, Anders Wennersten  wrote:

> What is WMFs position on Wikiwand [1]?
>
> is it a complement or a commercial run interface that is  better that we
> can offer?
>
> Anders
>
> [1] http://www.wikiwand.com/about
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand

[Keegan Peterzell]

Hey Gerard,

I think you might have missed *my* point? Please note that I was nuancing
something that Adam said that caught my eye. I broadly agree with your
(Gerard's) position.

You say: The notion that "people just want the content no matter how great
of awful
the skin is" is awful.

I agree it's an awful notion, but often times facts of the matter are
awful. Wikimedia content turns up in all kinds of curious places, in all
kinds of formats and design far beyond our control - because we make the
information free for people to do so, because that's what we want. We can
and should concentrate on our user interface, but I think removing/slimming
down/hiding editing tools in the interest of displaying content does a
disservice to what we do. The Wikiwands of the world should be welcomed to
rethink how to display content, we should learn from them, but I do not
think we should emulate them. Let them do their thing with our content, and
we can do ours. I don't see it as a competition, we should continue to do
what we can to create and curate more content for both our own use as well
as reuse, that's our end of the bargain.

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Adam Wight  wrote:

>
> Keegan, what do you think about a feature flag which would control which
> use cases the interface is optimized for?  We could, for example, make the
> editor interface much richer if it wasn't also supporting pure reading.\
>
> -Adam


I like this idea.

-- 
~Keegan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan

This is my personal email address. Everything sent from this email address
is in a personal capacity.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand

[Adam Wight]

GerardM,

I liked the way you said it the first time,
> Readers in turn do not need all the tools of editors but we do want to
convert them to editors. It does not follow that they will be enticed to
become one by all the clutter.
> The objective is therefore to invite them in a less cluttered way and
give them the option to enable the "clutter" an editor needs.

That's a much stronger statement without the hyperbole and invective.

Anyway, I appreciated your original statement, and also Keegan's point that
part of our mission should be to highlight the fact that our content is
written by individuals and not sponsored hacks like so much of the rest of
the world's media.

Keegan, what do you think about a feature flag which would control which
use cases the interface is optimized for?  We could, for example, make the
editor interface much richer if it wasn't also supporting pure reading.\

-Adam

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Gerard Meijssen 
wrote:

> Hoi,
> I think you have missed the point badly.
>
> Wikiwand is not about the communities and their pride. It is about what the
> Wikimedia Foundation stands for. It is sharing the sum of all knowledge.
> When we do a piss poor job and let Wikiwand steal the cake we have our
> priorities fatally wrong.
>
> The notion that "people just want the content no matter how great of awful
> the skin is" is awful. Really,
>
> The notion that the only thing we are there for is to disseminate it is
> plain awful because it reads as if we should give up and hand it all over
> to Wikiwand. If that is your opinion why have people concentrate on our
> User Interface? You must be kidding.
> Thanks,
>   GerardM
>
> On 31 March 2016 at 20:39, Keegan Peterzell  wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 12:56 PM, Adam Wight 
> wrote:
> >
> > > To second what others have said, I personally love the idea that a
> > reading
> > > interface should include less editor clutter, until it is requested.
> > > There's a task for this, if anyone would like to help push that
> > > investigation forward:
> > > https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T106439
> >
> >
> > ​Perhaps that would be better flipped: if you want a cleaner interface,
> one
> > is available, but we intentionally want/need/must keep "editor clutter"
> out
> > front. Communities are quite proud of that so-called clutter and actively
> > want to put it in front of people. The clutter got people in and built
> our
> > projects, removing it undoubtedly means less editors. Generally speaking,
> > everyone is a reader and an editor is a reader that clicks edit. They're
> > not, and should not be, distinct classes of users.
> >
> > The fact of the matter is that people just want the content, no matter
> how
> > great or awful the skin is, and they will go where ever makes it easiest
> to
> > get it. This doesn't mean that we have to be the destination to read the
> > content, that's not in our mission statement. We're to disseminate it.
> >
> > --
> > ~Keegan
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
> >
> > This is my personal email address. Everything sent from this email
> address
> > is in a personal capacity.
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
I think you have missed the point badly.

Wikiwand is not about the communities and their pride. It is about what the
Wikimedia Foundation stands for. It is sharing the sum of all knowledge.
When we do a piss poor job and let Wikiwand steal the cake we have our
priorities fatally wrong.

The notion that "people just want the content no matter how great of awful
the skin is" is awful. Really,

The notion that the only thing we are there for is to disseminate it is
plain awful because it reads as if we should give up and hand it all over
to Wikiwand. If that is your opinion why have people concentrate on our
User Interface? You must be kidding.
Thanks,
  GerardM

On 31 March 2016 at 20:39, Keegan Peterzell  wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 12:56 PM, Adam Wight  wrote:
>
> > To second what others have said, I personally love the idea that a
> reading
> > interface should include less editor clutter, until it is requested.
> > There's a task for this, if anyone would like to help push that
> > investigation forward:
> > https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T106439
>
>
> ​Perhaps that would be better flipped: if you want a cleaner interface, one
> is available, but we intentionally want/need/must keep "editor clutter" out
> front. Communities are quite proud of that so-called clutter and actively
> want to put it in front of people. The clutter got people in and built our
> projects, removing it undoubtedly means less editors. Generally speaking,
> everyone is a reader and an editor is a reader that clicks edit. They're
> not, and should not be, distinct classes of users.
>
> The fact of the matter is that people just want the content, no matter how
> great or awful the skin is, and they will go where ever makes it easiest to
> get it. This doesn't mean that we have to be the destination to read the
> content, that's not in our mission statement. We're to disseminate it.
>
> --
> ~Keegan
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
>
> This is my personal email address. Everything sent from this email address
> is in a personal capacity.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand

[Keegan Peterzell]

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 12:56 PM, Adam Wight  wrote:

> To second what others have said, I personally love the idea that a reading
> interface should include less editor clutter, until it is requested.
> There's a task for this, if anyone would like to help push that
> investigation forward:
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T106439


​Perhaps that would be better flipped: if you want a cleaner interface, one
is available, but we intentionally want/need/must keep "editor clutter" out
front. Communities are quite proud of that so-called clutter and actively
want to put it in front of people. The clutter got people in and built our
projects, removing it undoubtedly means less editors. Generally speaking,
everyone is a reader and an editor is a reader that clicks edit. They're
not, and should not be, distinct classes of users.

The fact of the matter is that people just want the content, no matter how
great or awful the skin is, and they will go where ever makes it easiest to
get it. This doesn't mean that we have to be the destination to read the
content, that's not in our mission statement. We're to disseminate it.

-- 
~Keegan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan

This is my personal email address. Everything sent from this email address
is in a personal capacity.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand

[Dan Garry]

On 31 March 2016 at 10:27, Anders Wennersten 
wrote:
>
> Besides the interface as such, where several have given, for me,
> interesting feedback, I wonder over the funding banner.
>
> Would not a widespread use of Wikiwand mean that readers no longer get the
> "begging" banner. And would that not mean a risk of decreasing funding?


My responsibility is product development; I leave such questions to
the Advancement
Department
, as
their responsibility.

Dan

-- 
Dan Garry
Lead Product Manager, Discovery
Wikimedia Foundation
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand

[Adam Wight]

To second what others have said, I personally love the idea that a reading
interface should include less editor clutter, until it is requested.
There's a task for this, if anyone would like to help push that
investigation forward:
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T106439

There's also some history behind the idea of making the Edit button more
prominent... According to legend, there was one an experiment in which the
edit tab was rendered with a green background, and it succeeded in drawing
more new editors in, BUT... The editing interface was hostile enough at
that point that we decided to not go with the more prominent button,
because we were driving people towards a broken experience. I'm far removed
from this work, so I don't know if this is still the consensus at the
Wikimedia Foundation, I'd like to hear more either way from people who are
more involved.

Thanks,
Adam
[[mw:User:Adamw]]



Den 2016-03-31 kl. 19:19, skrev Dan Garry:

>

> On 30 March 2016 at 23:39, Anders Wennersten 
> wrote:
>

>> What is WMFs position on Wikiwand [1]?

>>
> There is no "official WMF position" on Wikiwand. The Wikimedia Foundation
> is quite a diverse collection of individuals with a range of different
> opinions. :-)
>
> Personally, I like Wikiwand. I think there's some things they do really
> well, like their table of contents on desktop, and some things that they
> could improve, like the clutter of the interface on mobile devices. The
> performance of their website used to be incredibly poor, so much so that
it
> took over a minute to load on my iPhone 4. They seem to have made quite
> some strides in that area though, because I don't have this problem at all
> on my Nexus 5.
>
> I've tried contacting them a few times to share knowledge and see how we
> could collaborate, but I never received any response from them.
>
> I hope they keep improving their interface. I think it's a worthwhile
> project.
>
> Thanks,
> Dan
>

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand

[Anders Wennersten]

Thanks Dan.

Besides the interface as such, where several have given, for me, 
interesting feedback, I wonder over the funding banner.


Would not a widespread use of Wikiwand mean that readers no longer get 
the "begging" banner. And would that not mean a risk of decreasing funding?


Anders





Den 2016-03-31 kl. 19:19, skrev Dan Garry:

On 30 March 2016 at 23:39, Anders Wennersten 
wrote:


What is WMFs position on Wikiwand [1]?


There is no "official WMF position" on Wikiwand. The Wikimedia Foundation
is quite a diverse collection of individuals with a range of different
opinions. :-)

Personally, I like Wikiwand. I think there's some things they do really
well, like their table of contents on desktop, and some things that they
could improve, like the clutter of the interface on mobile devices. The
performance of their website used to be incredibly poor, so much so that it
took over a minute to load on my iPhone 4. They seem to have made quite
some strides in that area though, because I don't have this problem at all
on my Nexus 5.

I've tried contacting them a few times to share knowledge and see how we
could collaborate, but I never received any response from them.

I hope they keep improving their interface. I think it's a worthwhile
project.

Thanks,
Dan




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand

[Dan Garry]

On 30 March 2016 at 23:39, Anders Wennersten 
wrote:

> What is WMFs position on Wikiwand [1]?
>

There is no "official WMF position" on Wikiwand. The Wikimedia Foundation
is quite a diverse collection of individuals with a range of different
opinions. :-)

Personally, I like Wikiwand. I think there's some things they do really
well, like their table of contents on desktop, and some things that they
could improve, like the clutter of the interface on mobile devices. The
performance of their website used to be incredibly poor, so much so that it
took over a minute to load on my iPhone 4. They seem to have made quite
some strides in that area though, because I don't have this problem at all
on my Nexus 5.

I've tried contacting them a few times to share knowledge and see how we
could collaborate, but I never received any response from them.

I hope they keep improving their interface. I think it's a worthwhile
project.

Thanks,
Dan

-- 
Dan Garry
Lead Product Manager, Discovery
Wikimedia Foundation
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand

[Peter Southwood]

I agree with this. A permanently visible but reasonably small and unobtrusive 
edit button that opens into visual editor could be a way to do this.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Gerard Meijssen
Sent: Thursday, 31 March 2016 5:08 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand

Hoi,
When we recognise that an editor has different needs we should provide editors 
with different tools. Readers in turn do not need all the tools of editors but 
we do want to convert them to editors. It does not follow that they will be 
enticed to become one by all the clutter.

The objective is therefore to invite them in a less cluttered way and give them 
the option to enable the "clutter" an editor needs. This can be done in 
different ways.. It just takes the recognition what it is we want and need and 
that one size fits all is plain stupid.
Thanks,
   GerardM



On 31 March 2016 at 16:52, WereSpielChequers 
wrote:

> I don't know about the WMF's position re Wikiwand, but I see Wikiwand 
> as a more reader friendly way to view Wikipedia. We have far more 
> readers than editors so in some sense this is a good thing. I can 
> understand a reader being more interested in seeing the table of 
> contents in the left hand margin than a bunch of links to "recent 
> changes" and even "what links here". But the more you hide the various 
> functions that are of interest to editors the more difficult it 
> becomes to recruit editors from amongst our readership, and in the 
> long run without new editors we can't maintain the site. Despite many 
> attempts we don't yet have a viable alternative way of recruiting new 
> editors other than the edit buttons on our sites, so any attempt to 
> make the editing features less obvious is a threat to our future
>
> The problem is that most designers don't like clutter, and to a non 
> editor many of the bits of the interface that are most useful to 
> editors are clutter. I'm not sure what the solution is to this. One 
> possibility would be a more gradualised interface, one that always 
> shows you one or more editing options than you have used, and ideally 
> different ones or in different form so you notice them. I seem to 
> remember some successful tests a while back that simply modified the 
> edit button to make it more prominent or even just different. In 
> theory simply changing the edit button to so that for a month IPs see 
> it as  "fix this" or "correct an error" should stop people mentally blanking 
> the edit button out as part of the furniture.
>
> We also have a problem that some of our metrics value visits to 
> Wikimedia sites above viewing Wikimedia content on mirrors such as 
> WikiWand. We've had a similar problem in the GLAM program trying to 
> convince museums etc that such a view is illogical and if your mission 
> is to make content available to all humanity you should value hits to 
> your content on mirrors equally to hits to that same content on your 
> own website. Hopefully it is just a historic problem that will recede 
> as it becomes easier to get metrics that include mirrors, but it is a 
> barrier that prevents some GLAMS from sharing media onto Wikimedia 
> Commons and hugely ironic that we have the problem ourselves in our own 
> metrics.
>
>
> Jonathan / WereSpielChequers
>
>
>
>
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 08:39:46 +0200
> > From: Anders Wennersten 
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
> > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand
> > Message-ID: <56fcc632.2090...@anderswennersten.se>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
> >
> > What is WMFs position on Wikiwand [1]?
> >
> > is it a complement or a commercial run interface that is  better 
> > that we can offer?
> >
> > Anders
> >
> > [1] http://www.wikiwand.com/about
> >
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand

[John Mark Vandenberg]

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 7:24 PM, James Heilman  wrote:
> There output of our mainpage however is horrible
> http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Main_Page

On my LG L Bello 5.0" mobile phone it is worse than on desktop, with
that large language selection box taking over all of the screen and
not able to be closed, with only bits of the ugly mess in the
background.

And it is stale, showing February 25 as the current date for "On this day.."

However, that page isnt prominent in their system.

Instead they prominently link to http://www.wikiwand.com/news , which
is a very nice version of the English Wikipedia main page that looks
like it is in sync with the latest version on English Wikiped.

-- 
John Vandenberg

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
When we recognise that an editor has different needs we should provide
editors with different tools. Readers in turn do not need all the tools of
editors but we do want to convert them to editors. It does not follow that
they will be enticed to become one by all the clutter.

The objective is therefore to invite them in a less cluttered way and give
them the option to enable the "clutter" an editor needs. This can be done
in different ways.. It just takes the recognition what it is we want and
need and that one size fits all is plain stupid.
Thanks,
   GerardM



On 31 March 2016 at 16:52, WereSpielChequers 
wrote:

> I don't know about the WMF's position re Wikiwand, but I see Wikiwand as a
> more reader friendly way to view Wikipedia. We have far more readers than
> editors so in some sense this is a good thing. I can understand a reader
> being more interested in seeing the table of contents in the left hand
> margin than a bunch of links to "recent changes" and even "what links
> here". But the more you hide the various functions that are of interest to
> editors the more difficult it becomes to recruit editors from amongst our
> readership, and in the long run without new editors we can't maintain the
> site. Despite many attempts we don't yet have a viable alternative way of
> recruiting new editors other than the edit buttons on our sites, so any
> attempt to make the editing features less obvious is a threat to our future
>
> The problem is that most designers don't like clutter, and to a non editor
> many of the bits of the interface that are most useful to editors are
> clutter. I'm not sure what the solution is to this. One possibility would
> be a more gradualised interface, one that always shows you one or more
> editing options than you have used, and ideally different ones or in
> different form so you notice them. I seem to remember some successful tests
> a while back that simply modified the edit button to make it more prominent
> or even just different. In theory simply changing the edit button to so
> that for a month IPs see it as  "fix this" or "correct an error" should
> stop people mentally blanking the edit button out as part of the furniture.
>
> We also have a problem that some of our metrics value visits to Wikimedia
> sites above viewing Wikimedia content on mirrors such as WikiWand. We've
> had a similar problem in the GLAM program trying to convince museums etc
> that such a view is illogical and if your mission is to make content
> available to all humanity you should value hits to your content on mirrors
> equally to hits to that same content on your own website. Hopefully it is
> just a historic problem that will recede as it becomes easier to get
> metrics that include mirrors, but it is a barrier that prevents some GLAMS
> from sharing media onto Wikimedia Commons and hugely ironic that we have
> the problem ourselves in our own metrics.
>
>
> Jonathan / WereSpielChequers
>
>
>
>
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 08:39:46 +0200
> > From: Anders Wennersten 
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
> > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand
> > Message-ID: <56fcc632.2090...@anderswennersten.se>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
> >
> > What is WMFs position on Wikiwand [1]?
> >
> > is it a complement or a commercial run interface that is  better that we
> > can offer?
> >
> > Anders
> >
> > [1] http://www.wikiwand.com/about
> >
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand

[WereSpielChequers]

I don't know about the WMF's position re Wikiwand, but I see Wikiwand as a
more reader friendly way to view Wikipedia. We have far more readers than
editors so in some sense this is a good thing. I can understand a reader
being more interested in seeing the table of contents in the left hand
margin than a bunch of links to "recent changes" and even "what links
here". But the more you hide the various functions that are of interest to
editors the more difficult it becomes to recruit editors from amongst our
readership, and in the long run without new editors we can't maintain the
site. Despite many attempts we don't yet have a viable alternative way of
recruiting new editors other than the edit buttons on our sites, so any
attempt to make the editing features less obvious is a threat to our future

The problem is that most designers don't like clutter, and to a non editor
many of the bits of the interface that are most useful to editors are
clutter. I'm not sure what the solution is to this. One possibility would
be a more gradualised interface, one that always shows you one or more
editing options than you have used, and ideally different ones or in
different form so you notice them. I seem to remember some successful tests
a while back that simply modified the edit button to make it more prominent
or even just different. In theory simply changing the edit button to so
that for a month IPs see it as  "fix this" or "correct an error" should
stop people mentally blanking the edit button out as part of the furniture.

We also have a problem that some of our metrics value visits to Wikimedia
sites above viewing Wikimedia content on mirrors such as WikiWand. We've
had a similar problem in the GLAM program trying to convince museums etc
that such a view is illogical and if your mission is to make content
available to all humanity you should value hits to your content on mirrors
equally to hits to that same content on your own website. Hopefully it is
just a historic problem that will recede as it becomes easier to get
metrics that include mirrors, but it is a barrier that prevents some GLAMS
from sharing media onto Wikimedia Commons and hugely ironic that we have
the problem ourselves in our own metrics.


Jonathan / WereSpielChequers




> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 08:39:46 +0200
> From: Anders Wennersten 
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand
> Message-ID: <56fcc632.2090...@anderswennersten.se>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> What is WMFs position on Wikiwand [1]?
>
> is it a complement or a commercial run interface that is  better that we
> can offer?
>
> Anders
>
> [1] http://www.wikiwand.com/about
>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand

[James Heilman]

I am fine with Wikiwand especially with their recent improvements. It is
basically a different skin for our content. Not everyone needs to like the
same style.

The gear at the top gives a bunch of ways you can customize the styling as
well. And it does link to use if people want to edit. As an editor I prefer
our greater prominence of the edit, history, and talk page buttons. They
are customized for reading. We being a working platform need to balance
reading and editing.

There output of our mainpage however is horrible
http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Main_Page

James

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 2:26 AM, Magnus Manske 
wrote:

> While this is true, there has been some improvement on Wikipedia. Desktop
> browsers now have the Wikiwand "media gallery" as the Media Viewer, and
> Wikivoyage (as a test platform) has the interactive maps.
>
> On mobile, things are even better; most of the Wikiwand mobile features are
> also in the official Wikipedia app, and then some.
>
> That multilingual search, though...
>
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 8:33 AM Gerard Meijssen  >
> wrote:
>
> > Hoi,
> > If anything they provide us a service. Anything they can do, we can do
> > integrated.  Anything they can do, we can learn from. Anything they prove
> > works better is often a discussion the others have lost their firm
> footing.
> >
> > We are very much stuck in fixed thinking modes. It is why Wikisource is
> > only about its editors and not about its readers. For one Wikisource
> there
> > has been something like Wikiwand and nobody cared. We know we can improve
> > the quality of Wikipedia's links and redlinks in the same way we improved
> > interwiki links, the improvement will be measurable and quick and it is
> not
> > even considered. There is enough we can do better, it is known by many,
> > particularly by the developers and UI people.
> >
> > We deserve Wikiwand because we could have done better. By making it a
> > company, the people behind Wikiwand put their money where there mouth is.
> > As an argument it is a strong one.
> >
> > NB we are doing better in places. When you have followed the road towards
> > mobile integration you will agree. However, there is still so much that
> can
> > be done. It starts with reflection of many of our hobby horses and
> > ingrained positions.
> > Thanks,
> >GerardM
> >
> > On 31 March 2016 at 08:39, Anders Wennersten 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > What is WMFs position on Wikiwand [1]?
> > >
> > > is it a complement or a commercial run interface that is  better that
> we
> > > can offer?
> > >
> > > Anders
> > >
> > > [1] http://www.wikiwand.com/about
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand

[Magnus Manske]

While this is true, there has been some improvement on Wikipedia. Desktop
browsers now have the Wikiwand "media gallery" as the Media Viewer, and
Wikivoyage (as a test platform) has the interactive maps.

On mobile, things are even better; most of the Wikiwand mobile features are
also in the official Wikipedia app, and then some.

That multilingual search, though...

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 8:33 AM Gerard Meijssen 
wrote:

> Hoi,
> If anything they provide us a service. Anything they can do, we can do
> integrated.  Anything they can do, we can learn from. Anything they prove
> works better is often a discussion the others have lost their firm footing.
>
> We are very much stuck in fixed thinking modes. It is why Wikisource is
> only about its editors and not about its readers. For one Wikisource there
> has been something like Wikiwand and nobody cared. We know we can improve
> the quality of Wikipedia's links and redlinks in the same way we improved
> interwiki links, the improvement will be measurable and quick and it is not
> even considered. There is enough we can do better, it is known by many,
> particularly by the developers and UI people.
>
> We deserve Wikiwand because we could have done better. By making it a
> company, the people behind Wikiwand put their money where there mouth is.
> As an argument it is a strong one.
>
> NB we are doing better in places. When you have followed the road towards
> mobile integration you will agree. However, there is still so much that can
> be done. It starts with reflection of many of our hobby horses and
> ingrained positions.
> Thanks,
>GerardM
>
> On 31 March 2016 at 08:39, Anders Wennersten 
> wrote:
>
> > What is WMFs position on Wikiwand [1]?
> >
> > is it a complement or a commercial run interface that is  better that we
> > can offer?
> >
> > Anders
> >
> > [1] http://www.wikiwand.com/about
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
If anything they provide us a service. Anything they can do, we can do
integrated.  Anything they can do, we can learn from. Anything they prove
works better is often a discussion the others have lost their firm footing.

We are very much stuck in fixed thinking modes. It is why Wikisource is
only about its editors and not about its readers. For one Wikisource there
has been something like Wikiwand and nobody cared. We know we can improve
the quality of Wikipedia's links and redlinks in the same way we improved
interwiki links, the improvement will be measurable and quick and it is not
even considered. There is enough we can do better, it is known by many,
particularly by the developers and UI people.

We deserve Wikiwand because we could have done better. By making it a
company, the people behind Wikiwand put their money where there mouth is.
As an argument it is a strong one.

NB we are doing better in places. When you have followed the road towards
mobile integration you will agree. However, there is still so much that can
be done. It starts with reflection of many of our hobby horses and
ingrained positions.
Thanks,
   GerardM

On 31 March 2016 at 08:39, Anders Wennersten 
wrote:

> What is WMFs position on Wikiwand [1]?
>
> is it a complement or a commercial run interface that is  better that we
> can offer?
>
> Anders
>
> [1] http://www.wikiwand.com/about
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Wikiwand

[Anders Wennersten]

What is WMFs position on Wikiwand [1]?

is it a complement or a commercial run interface that is  better that we 
can offer?


Anders

[1] http://www.wikiwand.com/about

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,