Comments on: Helping readers improve Wikipedia: First results from Article Feedback v5

By: Sirajul Islam

Sirajul Islam — Tue, 27 Mar 2012 15:40:07 +0000

Thanks for taking the initiative. I think, it’s an opportunity for a reader to post comment on a content of the English Wikipedia. If a reader thinks that s/he has something to add (with evidence and sources), it will help him/her in doing so. The earlier system wasn’t working at all. At least I can say this from my experience. I’m happy to know this new thing. I’ll try this…

By: frank

frank — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 13:37:42 +0000

Dario – Thanks for the answer. I’ll try to join the next IRC session.

By: Wikimedia Greece blog » Blog Archive » Βοηθώντας τους αναγνώστες να βελτιώσουν τη Βικιπαίδεια

Thu, 22 Mar 2012 22:53:20 +0000

[...] Διαβάστε περισσότερα [...]

By: Dario

Dario — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 18:07:57 +0000

Frank, Liam – thanks for your feedback. Let me clarify the purpose of this experiment. We are releasing two slightly more prominent links not because we want to propose two new designs, but only to test whether an increased visibility produces an increased proportion of useless, non actionable feedback. The test will last for the amount of time we need to collect enough data and reach significance in the analysis. We expect this stage to last no more than 2-3 weeks (depending on how much data we collect) before we move on to stage 3. We won't be changing the sample of articles for this new experiment: we'll be still using the same small sample of articles we worked with since December. You may have seen from the full report that the docked link significantly underperforms the bottom widget in terms of volume (even though their combined effect is significantly higher than the bottom widget alone). This means that most of the feedback we collect is affected by the length of the article (as we reported in AFT4): unless you scroll to the bottom you won't be able to see that you can submit suggestions. Why care about the relation between feedback usefulness and volume? The reason is broader than Article Feedback. If we want to use feedback tools (AFT, MoodBar) as on-ramp/editor engagement strategies we need to strike the right balance between engagement and community workload for moderation/triage. We cannot introduce a tool that simply produces more workload for the editor community. Understanding what happens when we increase the stream of new contributions is the sole purpose of this experiment. I'll post a similar explanation on the purpose of this experiment on Meta and WP:AFT5 so other editors can chime in. I'd like to hear your thoughts on how we should proceed. If you can make it, you should really try and join the IRC AFT Office hours.

By: frank

frank — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 02:25:35 +0000

I agree with Wittylama. That button is going to stir people up and most people will find it outrageous. Docked items on websites are a no-no.

By: Wittylama

Wittylama — Wed, 21 Mar 2012 22:43:39 +0000

Sounds like interesting developments and good data to back it up :-)

However…
“…a larger graphic button docked at the lower right corner of the browser window.”

NO. Please STOP.
The WMF recently reported about not “spending social and political capital on things it doesn’t need to”. This is one of those things. You’ll get such a hostile response to this that it will greatly undermine any support for the AFT as a whole.

Just saying…