It might be premature to draw any conclusions about editor response to AFT5, given it hasn't been fully rolled-out. I rarely see it as a reader (admittedly it's hard to spot on a large article with lots of citations) and I don't think I have ever seen it on pages I have edited recently (and I do look for the feedback) -- it's difficult to have an editor response to something that isn't there.
Kerry -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of ENWP Pine Sent: Friday, 7 September 2012 6:06 AM To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities Subject: [Wiki-research-l] AFT5 regarding RJensen question RJensen wrote in the War of 1812 email thread: "Comments: I have not seen any editor make actual use of the Article Feedback tool -- are there examples? Yes Wikipedians are very proud of their vast half-billion-person audience. However they do not ask "what features are most useful for a high school student or teacher/ a university student/ etc"" This is a very interesting question. What have been the benefits of AFT5? I have seen complaints about spam and suppressible material being written in AFT5. What benefits has it had? With your permission, RJensen, I'll forward your question and mine to Wikimedia-l for discussion there as well. Pine _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
