"David Gerard" <[email protected]> wrote in message news://news.gmane.org/[email protected]... > 2009/8/21 Jay Litwyn <[email protected]>: >> "David Gerard" <[email protected]> wrote in message > >>> For the now-largely-abandoned article validation feature, here's a >>> suggested list: >>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/En_validation_topics#Consolidated_plan >>> The list there is: > >> The whole thing, methinks would be on a RATE tab. "What were you looking >> for?" is a search box with your current search in it. > > > Oooooh. Well spotted. Yes, the Special:Search page needs a "What were > you looking for, in detail?/Did you find it?" on it. > > >> I do not think anybody >> asks all of those questions unless they contribute. If they answer in the >> positive, then maybe a template should disappear. If they answer in the >> negative, then maybe it should appear. Of course, if they edit, that >> might >> be a quick way of learning which templates apply, so the user could place >> the template closer to where it belongs in an article, or just follow >> links >> in the template to directions on making improvements. > > > I'd expect here we're talking about a simple "rate this article" > clicky thing for readers who can't be bothered editing or are scared > to, but still want to make Wikipedia better somehow.
It could be a set of five bowling pins on the right quarter of a content warning, with a green checkmark on it by default and a red X over it if the user clicks. If the user saves a change, then that template disappears and they get a message on their talk page telling them how to reinforce their change. Most people would go the other way around and delay removing a content warning until they had done what they could about it--save final change and call it a strike. There could of course be people who can do a lot about a content warning without reading any fine manual, then become monsters and write more into our manual. _______ http://www.lovetolearnplace.com/SpecialDays/Labor/Workman%20of%20God%20Worksheet.pdf > (As I noted on the linked page, making full data available to anyone > who wants it is a good idea, and absolutely appropriate as it's part > of working on the encyclopedia. That may even go as far as making full > contributor/IP data available just as article history is. Thinking > about it, though, that may discourage ratings - they're anonymous on > most sites.) > > > - d. > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
