Hoi Romaine,
I am sorry but while I understand your frustration, you are not realistic
and you do no justice to the situation. To start with Wikidata is not user
friendly at all. It never was because development has been concentrating on
basic architecture and basic functionality. At that we are still waiting
for much needed basic functionality for instance statements that indicate
what unit they are (kilo, meter, calories etc) and queries.
When you read the replies of Lydia, it is quite plain that what we have is
an intermediate step towards a different user interface. What we have now
will pass. When you consider the old UI, it may have worked for you but I
find it is lacking basic functionality for editors. My pet pieve is that
when I add a URL for an item, it is not able to strip all the web junk away
to be left with the Qnumber. Now I have to do it by hand and, I do that a
lot. Some work on similar issues were done in the "paper cuts".
What I am looking for in the new UI is similarity with what Reasonator
looks like. My motivation is that in this way it will be possible to have
an overview of all the data. The data becomes informative in this way. That
may not help editors much. Much of the data is entered by bots and external
tools, they are likely to be affected in different ways by the continuing
stream of changes as well.
I am sure you have seen all the huha around Flow and the visual editor. I
loathed the way people bullied their opinion on everybody else. PLEASE let
us not go that way with Wikidata.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 10 October 2014 04:20, Romaine Wiki <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sorry Lydia, but I can't read that in your reply. I point on an overlooked
> issue with designing the current version. I see no recognition that this is
> an issue that is taken serious and needs to be solved. You mention that
> there are issues that will be solved, but the issue raised here is not
> taken into account (it seems).
>
> You say that you will move forward. I reply on that the current design is
> a downfall compared with how it was. I conclude based on what I notice in
> the editing workflow that the change is not an improvement.
>
> In your reply you do not give the impression that the issue raised here is
> going to be solved, nor that you want to restore the previous workable
> version, so in that perspective you keep the current design which is
> troubling. It is a step back. If someone would ask me to put the versions
> in chronological order of development based on how it works for users, than
> the current version would come before the previous version. If the current
> design would have been followed by the previous design, I would have
> congratulated
> the Wikidata team with this major improvement, which makes editing Wikidata
> for users much easier.
>
> Are there any plans yet in what the workflow of users is restored to a
> workable situation?
>
> Romaine
>
>
>
> 2014-10-09 18:08 GMT+02:00 Lydia Pintscher <[email protected]>:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Romaine Wiki <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > Hello Lydia,
>> >
>> > I can understand that it is not restored back in the previous
>> situation, but
>> > this is not an improvement. Editing Wikidata is made harder, more
>> difficult,
>> > and more clumpsy. This change of a new design is counter-productive. For
>> > months we are asking people to add stuff to Wikidata if they created an
>> > article, we stop with that. We really can't explain this change. It is
>> also
>> > counter-productive if a wrong decision is made and the effects for end
>> users
>> > are ignored, while they have (or had) to deal with it every time. This
>> > version is not an improvement but a step back in time. I am sure you and
>> > your team have been working hard on this, but apparently in the process
>> it
>> > has been missed how a lot of users work with Wikidata.
>> >
>> > That you notice some issues is fine, but that is no answer at all to the
>> > current complaints. Seeing the reactions from other users elsewhere I
>> am not
>> > alone in this.
>> >
>> > But one question is answered, you are not willing to restore a better
>> > version of the software to restore the downfall but want to keep this
>> > annoying not handy working version.
>>
>> No that's not what I said. I said we are going to move forward and
>> make this better so the issues you are having now will no longer be
>> there. By no means do I want to insist on keeping the current status -
>> quite the opposite.
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>> Lydia
>>
>> --
>> Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher
>> Product Manager for Wikidata
>>
>> Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.
>> Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24
>> 10963 Berlin
>> www.wikimedia.de
>>
>> Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
>>
>> Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg
>> unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das
>> Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikidata-l mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikidata-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
