[WikiEN-l] [Wikitech-l] Fwd: Wired: Wikipedia to Color Code Untrustworthy Text

[FT2]

True. The moment you give people a tool, many people will simplistically
assume what it does or rely unthinkingly on it.


   - WikiTrust might be described as "a way to see how long an edit endured
   and how much trust it seems to have"; in most users' hands it'll be "its
   colored red/blue so its right/wrong."
   - People won't think, they'll assume and rely.


If it is introduced, then I would suggest introducing it as a gadget for
admins and experienced users, a limited number at first. Communally, it
shouldn't be available to all, but to those who request it and seem to
understand what it shows and how to interpret it (perhaps package it with
rollback or something that gets a little scrutiny of their cluefulness?)

Thats for the future, but no harm thinking ahead. Very wary of what people
will assume it means, and that we're clear it is a tool that needs
considerable experienced interpretation and is *misleading *without it.

FT2





On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 7:23 PM, David Goodman <dgoodmanny at gmail.com> wrote:

> I am a little concerned that we are adopting a metric into our
> interface without adequate testing. Quality or trust in an article is
> not a simple numerical matter, much less a rough scale of a few
> categories.  it will take a lot of experimentation with it until the
> rest of us can decide if its valid enough to be part of our actual
> interface--this is a decision that needs to be made by each community,
> and I hope it will be made carefully, before we commit to it.
>
> 'What people may want to use as an add on is their affair--what we
> offer to them as a gadget is something else. I'm not sure we have any
> formal method for approving them, but we ought to. The WMF should not
> be prescribing it for us.
>
> That this should be done at the same time as the flagged revisions
> test is yet another complication.
>
> David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 2:15 PM, FT2<ft2.wiki at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 6:33 PM, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> 2009/8/31 FT2 <ft2.wiki at gmail.com>:
> >> > Yes. Incredibly useful. What I'd like would be when colors are shown,
> if
> >> you
> >> > hover over some text it pops up a hover of the user who wrote it and
> when
> >> it
> >> > was written (the revision).
> >>
> >> A simple version of that is already implemented. Go to
> >>
> >> http://wikitrust.soe.ucsc.edu/index.php/Main_Page
> >>
> >> and click the "check text" tab to see it, hover over a piece of text,
> >> and click it. The hover shows the username, and by clicking it, you'll
> >> get a diff. (This may not be the latest code.)
> >>
> >> > A show/hide button on the screen, with "default status" in
> preferences,
> >> > please. And maybe an interface issue to consider, having a narrow top
> bar
> >> > that doesn't scroll, where status, flagged revision etc info can be
> put
> >> that
> >> > will always be visible no matter where you are in the article.
> >>
> >> There's definitely a need to consolidate the FlaggedRevs revision tag
> >> indicator with any WikiTrust UI elements.
> >> --
> >> Erik Möller
> >>  Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
> >>
> >
> >
> > Added a note on it here: <
> > http://usability.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Releases/Acai#Mini_toolbar_idea
> >
> >
> > FT2
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>