Hi everyone,
So I think by now, most of us have experienced the positive impact of the Thanks tool (https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Thanks) on our wikis.
I'd like to hear thoughts about adding the function to more places. Thanks currently visible on...
- Page histories - Diffs
I'd like to propose that anywhere that I can undo or rollback an edit, I should be able to thank someone. If that location provides me enough information to revert an edit, surely it provides me enough context to show gratitude as well. With that proposal in mind, some suggestions of new locations includes...
- Watchlist - RecentChanges
A slightly expanded scope might also include all public logs (move, delete, patrol, etc.). This is requested already at https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58485 but may be harder to do.
Thoughts?
Yes, please. I'm often frustrated at not being able to use Thanks from my watchlist.
Building in both Thanks and a reply feature for individual edits is something that Wiki Education Foundation is planning to try for the RecentActivityFeed course monitoring tool we're working on. In its first iteration [1], the feed will include inline diffs (as adapted from Writ Keeper's awesome user script [2]), so that users can see the details of edits without leaving the page. It makes sense from there to make it easier to both Thank users and post messages related to individual diffs.
I suspect it would be a major boon to editor engagement — for Thanks usage in particular — if the inline diffs concept was adapted to be an easily accessible option for all users.
[1] = http://education.wmflabs.org/w/index.php?title=Education_Program:WikiWorks/M... [2] = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Writ_Keeper/Scripts/inlineDiffDocs
-Sage
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Steven Walling swalling@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi everyone,
So I think by now, most of us have experienced the positive impact of the Thanks tool (https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Thanks) on our wikis.
I'd like to hear thoughts about adding the function to more places. Thanks currently visible on...
- Page histories
- Diffs
I'd like to propose that anywhere that I can undo or rollback an edit, I should be able to thank someone. If that location provides me enough information to revert an edit, surely it provides me enough context to show gratitude as well. With that proposal in mind, some suggestions of new locations includes...
- Watchlist
- RecentChanges
A slightly expanded scope might also include all public logs (move, delete, patrol, etc.). This is requested already at https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58485 but may be harder to do.
Thoughts?
-- Steven Walling, Product Manager https://wikimediafoundation.org/
EE mailing list EE@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ee
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Sage Ross ragesoss+wikipedia@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, please. I'm often frustrated at not being able to use Thanks from my watchlist.
+1
Building in both Thanks and a reply feature for individual edits is something that Wiki Education Foundation is planning to try for the RecentActivityFeed course monitoring tool we're working on. In its first iteration [1], the feed will include inline diffs (as adapted from Writ Keeper's awesome user script [2]), so that users can see the details of edits without leaving the page. It makes sense from there to make it easier to both Thank users and post messages related to individual diffs.
I suspect it would be a major boon to editor engagement — for Thanks usage in particular — if the inline diffs concept was adapted to be an easily accessible option for all users.
[1] = http://education.wmflabs.org/w/index.php?title=Education_Program:WikiWorks/M... [2] = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Writ_Keeper/Scripts/inlineDiffDocs
-Sage
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Steven Walling swalling@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi everyone,
So I think by now, most of us have experienced the positive impact of the Thanks tool (https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Thanks) on our
wikis.
I'd like to hear thoughts about adding the function to more places.
Thanks
currently visible on...
- Page histories
- Diffs
I'd like to propose that anywhere that I can undo or rollback an edit, I should be able to thank someone. If that location provides me enough information to revert an edit, surely it provides me enough context to
show
gratitude as well. With that proposal in mind, some suggestions of new locations includes...
- Watchlist
- RecentChanges
A slightly expanded scope might also include all public logs (move,
delete,
patrol, etc.). This is requested already at https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58485 but may be harder
to
do.
Thoughts?
-- Steven Walling, Product Manager https://wikimediafoundation.org/
EE mailing list EE@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ee
EE mailing list EE@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ee
On 11 September 2014 20:52, Steven Walling swalling@wikimedia.org wrote:
A slightly expanded scope might also include all public logs (move, delete, patrol, etc.). This is requested already at https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58485 but may be harder to do. Thoughts?
Yep, more thanks is good.
I urge again that it be made possible to thank IPs. I realise the problem is you might thank someone else, but then again nobody worries about threatening someone else over the previous user's bad edits ... we shouldn't worry too much about accidentally thanking someone for someone else's good edits.
- d.
This ties in with an idea I had for Flow. Could there be ways to thank, favorite, and +1 individual comments made via Flow, and sort Flow comments by +x count?
Pine On Sep 11, 2014 1:46 PM, "David Gerard" dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 11 September 2014 20:52, Steven Walling swalling@wikimedia.org wrote:
A slightly expanded scope might also include all public logs (move,
delete,
patrol, etc.). This is requested already at https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58485 but may be harder
to
do. Thoughts?
Yep, more thanks is good.
I urge again that it be made possible to thank IPs. I realise the problem is you might thank someone else, but then again nobody worries about threatening someone else over the previous user's bad edits ... we shouldn't worry too much about accidentally thanking someone for someone else's good edits.
- d.
EE mailing list EE@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ee
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
This ties in with an idea I had for Flow. Could there be ways to thank, favorite, and +1 individual comments made via Flow, and sort Flow comments by +x count?
You can already thank people for individual Flow posts/comments.
Cool. The ability to +1 a comment and for an individual editor to see comments sorted by +x would be good too.
Pine On Sep 11, 2014 4:25 PM, "Steven Walling" swalling@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
This ties in with an idea I had for Flow. Could there be ways to thank, favorite, and +1 individual comments made via Flow, and sort Flow comments by +x count?
You can already thank people for individual Flow posts/comments.
-- Steven Walling, Product Manager https://wikimediafoundation.org/
EE mailing list EE@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ee
On 09/11/2014 08:33 PM, Pine W wrote:
Cool. The ability to +1 a comment and for an individual editor to see comments sorted by +x would be good too.
This would need careful consideration. It could convert discussions of (sometimes complex) topics into competitions to rack up votes (even when it's not an "official" vote). This is part of why (IIRC) Thanks does not show a count.
Matt Flaschen
I think we are more mature than that. Wikipedia isn't middle school. (:
Pine On Sep 11, 2014 7:56 PM, "Matthew Flaschen" mflaschen@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 09/11/2014 08:33 PM, Pine W wrote:
Cool. The ability to +1 a comment and for an individual editor to see comments sorted by +x would be good too.
This would need careful consideration. It could convert discussions of (sometimes complex) topics into competitions to rack up votes (even when it's not an "official" vote). This is part of why (IIRC) Thanks does not show a count.
Matt Flaschen
EE mailing list EE@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ee
I urge again that it be made possible to thank IPs.
If this is considered, it may be worth it to expose any warning in a positive way that encourages registration (e.g., "Since that was an anonymous edit, you may not be the person who did it. You can get a more accurate information on the impact of your edits by creating an account").
That could help anonymous users to get exposed to the advantages of registering (without forcing them to do).
Pau
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 5:15 AM, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
I think we are more mature than that. Wikipedia isn't middle school. (:
Pine On Sep 11, 2014 7:56 PM, "Matthew Flaschen" mflaschen@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 09/11/2014 08:33 PM, Pine W wrote:
Cool. The ability to +1 a comment and for an individual editor to see comments sorted by +x would be good too.
This would need careful consideration. It could convert discussions of (sometimes complex) topics into competitions to rack up votes (even when it's not an "official" vote). This is part of why (IIRC) Thanks does not show a count.
Matt Flaschen
EE mailing list EE@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ee
EE mailing list EE@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ee
On 12 September 2014 12:10, Pau Giner pginer@wikimedia.org wrote:
I urge again that it be made possible to thank IPs.
If this is considered, it may be worth it to expose any warning in a positive way that encourages registration (e.g., "Since that was an anonymous edit, you may not be the person who did it. You can get a more accurate information on the impact of your edits by creating an account"). That could help anonymous users to get exposed to the advantages of registering (without forcing them to do).
I think that would completely solve most of the objections I've heard to the idea.
Really, I've been here for years and the buzz from a "thanks" was amazing. That's precisely what we really, really want someone trepidatiously making that first tentative IP typo correction to feel.
- d.
Could we sanity-check it so that (say) IP edits from more than a week or a month ago aren't thankable? This would reduce a lot of the chance of getting the wrong person, and I suspect most thanks are on edits made within the past 48 hours.
(actually, there's a fun research question - what's the time-distribution of thanks like?)
If IPs get thanks it suggests they're getting notifications. What other notifications make sense for an IP? "Your edit was reverted", with the same caveats?
Andrew.
On 12 September 2014 12:14, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 12 September 2014 12:10, Pau Giner pginer@wikimedia.org wrote:
I urge again that it be made possible to thank IPs.
If this is considered, it may be worth it to expose any warning in a positive way that encourages registration (e.g., "Since that was an anonymous edit, you may not be the person who did it. You can get a more accurate information on the impact of your edits by creating an account"). That could help anonymous users to get exposed to the advantages of registering (without forcing them to do).
I think that would completely solve most of the objections I've heard to the idea.
Really, I've been here for years and the buzz from a "thanks" was amazing. That's precisely what we really, really want someone trepidatiously making that first tentative IP typo correction to feel.
- d.
EE mailing list EE@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ee
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:45 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
Yep, more thanks is good.
I urge again that it be made possible to thank IPs. I realise the problem is you might thank someone else, but then again nobody worries about threatening someone else over the previous user's bad edits ... we shouldn't worry too much about accidentally thanking someone for someone else's good edits.
Actually sending thanks to IPs would require us to either send the notification in a new way, or deliver Echo notifications to anonymous editors. Either prospect is a major can of worms.
For now, it's relatively simple for us to consider adding the thanks link more places for registered users.
On 12 September 2014 17:34, Steven Walling swalling@wikimedia.org wrote:
Actually sending thanks to IPs would require us to either send the notification in a new way, or deliver Echo notifications to anonymous editors. Either prospect is a major can of worms.
Ah, OK! I didn't realise that complication factor ...
(still it'd be fantastic to have)
- d.
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 9:39 AM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
(still it'd be fantastic to have)
It might be easier to test the *other* end of the thanks pipeline, which is showing the thanks button to IPs.
On mobile, they have long done something nice, which is that watchlist links are shown to unregistered users, then you're prompted to log in or sign up. We should and could do be doing the same on desktop, and thanks could be a part of that. Once a user clicks it and chooses to log in or sign up, then you could bring them back to where they were and complete the action.
On 12 September 2014 17:43, Steven Walling swalling@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 9:39 AM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
(still it'd be fantastic to have)
It might be easier to test the *other* end of the thanks pipeline, which is showing the thanks button to IPs. On mobile, they have long done something nice, which is that watchlist links are shown to unregistered users, then you're prompted to log in or sign up. We should and could do be doing the same on desktop, and thanks could be a part of that. Once a user clicks it and chooses to log in or sign up, then you could bring them back to where they were and complete the action.
Yep, yep. Stuff to lure the IPs back.
- d.
How many estimated days of developer work is the "major can of worms" of delivering thank notifications only, in a new way, to IPs? As cans of worms go, I'm pretty sure it would not be on the major end of the scale, if an experienced developer actually quantified it. On Sep 12, 2014 6:40 AM, "David Gerard" dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 12 September 2014 17:34, Steven Walling swalling@wikimedia.org wrote:
Actually sending thanks to IPs would require us to either send the notification in a new way, or deliver Echo notifications to anonymous editors. Either prospect is a major can of worms.
Ah, OK! I didn't realise that complication factor ...
(still it'd be fantastic to have)
- d.
EE mailing list EE@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ee
James, please try assuming a bit of good faith - namely that Steven might occasionally work with experienced developers, and consult them on issues like this, given that he's the Product Manager for a major engineering team and all ;p.
On 12 September 2014 14:28, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
How many estimated days of developer work is the "major can of worms" of delivering thank notifications only, in a new way, to IPs? As cans of worms go, I'm pretty sure it would not be on the major end of the scale, if an experienced developer actually quantified it. On Sep 12, 2014 6:40 AM, "David Gerard" dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 12 September 2014 17:34, Steven Walling swalling@wikimedia.org wrote:
Actually sending thanks to IPs would require us to either send the notification in a new way, or deliver Echo notifications to anonymous editors. Either prospect is a major can of worms.
Ah, OK! I didn't realise that complication factor ...
(still it'd be fantastic to have)
- d.
EE mailing list EE@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ee
EE mailing list EE@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ee
Oliver, are you suggesting that asking for quantification is incompatible with assuming good faith, or implies bad faith?
Can you think of any editor engagement initiatives over the past years which were affected by the lack of quantified usability and quality assurance testing?
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Oliver Keyes okeyes@wikimedia.org wrote:
James, please try assuming a bit of good faith - namely that Steven might occasionally work with experienced developers, and consult them on issues like this, given that he's the Product Manager for a major engineering team and all ;p.
On 12 September 2014 14:28, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
How many estimated days of developer work is the "major can of worms" of delivering thank notifications only, in a new way, to IPs? As cans of worms go, I'm pretty sure it would not be on the major end of the scale, if an experienced developer actually quantified it.
On Sep 12, 2014 6:40 AM, "David Gerard" dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 12 September 2014 17:34, Steven Walling swalling@wikimedia.org wrote:
Actually sending thanks to IPs would require us to either send the notification in a new way, or deliver Echo notifications to anonymous editors. Either prospect is a major can of worms.
Ah, OK! I didn't realise that complication factor ...
(still it'd be fantastic to have)
- d.
EE mailing list EE@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ee
EE mailing list EE@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ee
-- Oliver Keyes Research Analyst Wikimedia Foundation
EE mailing list EE@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ee
No, I'm suggesting that the implication of the sentence "As cans of worms go, I'm pretty sure it would not be on the major end of the scale, if an experienced developer actually quantified it." is "Steven didn't do his job" - IOW, that he didn't consult with one of said experienced engineers. I appreciate that's probably not what you intended to communicate; it was, however, what was communicated.
If quantification was incompatible with best practices I wouldn't be working in a job where the first word in the title is "research" ;p.
Anyway: this is a distraction from the core point of the thread, so I'll can (of worms) it.
On 12 September 2014 16:54, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
Oliver, are you suggesting that asking for quantification is incompatible with assuming good faith, or implies bad faith?
Can you think of any editor engagement initiatives over the past years which were affected by the lack of quantified usability and quality assurance testing?
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Oliver Keyes okeyes@wikimedia.org wrote:
James, please try assuming a bit of good faith - namely that Steven might occasionally work with experienced developers, and consult them on issues like this, given that he's the Product Manager for a major engineering
team
and all ;p.
On 12 September 2014 14:28, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
How many estimated days of developer work is the "major can of worms" of delivering thank notifications only, in a new way, to IPs? As cans of
worms
go, I'm pretty sure it would not be on the major end of the scale, if an experienced developer actually quantified it.
On Sep 12, 2014 6:40 AM, "David Gerard" dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 12 September 2014 17:34, Steven Walling swalling@wikimedia.org wrote:
Actually sending thanks to IPs would require us to either send the notification in a new way, or deliver Echo notifications to anonymous editors. Either prospect is a major can of worms.
Ah, OK! I didn't realise that complication factor ...
(still it'd be fantastic to have)
- d.
EE mailing list EE@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ee
EE mailing list EE@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ee
-- Oliver Keyes Research Analyst Wikimedia Foundation
EE mailing list EE@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ee
EE mailing list EE@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ee
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Oliver Keyes okeyes@wikimedia.org wrote:
No, I'm suggesting that the implication of the sentence "As cans of worms go, I'm pretty sure it would not be on the major end of the scale, if an experienced developer actually quantified it." is "Steven didn't do his job"
- IOW, that he didn't consult with one of said experienced engineers. I
appreciate that's probably not what you intended to communicate; it was, however, what was communicated.
I'm sorry you misunderstood. I was trying to communicate that in my experience as a commercial Mediawiki developer, I think adding thanks to IPs would be days to a few weeks of work for a single developer. I was also trying to communicate that "a major can of worms" is not a professional assessment of task complexity. I have no idea whether Steven consulted with anyone about the magnitude of the task and I find it very difficult to believe that expressing a contrary opinion and asking for a quantification would imply anything about whether or not he did to anyone.
On 09/12/2014 02:28 PM, James Salsman wrote:
How many estimated days of developer work is the "major can of worms" of delivering thank notifications only, in a new way, to IPs? As cans of worms go, I'm pretty sure it would not be on the major end of the scale, if an experienced developer actually quantified it.
I doubt we would make a whole new backend just for anon recipients of Thanks. That leaves only two possibilities:
* Have Echo support anonymous recipients (https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=56828). Apparently Wikihow has code for this, and there is a WIP patch, but Wikihow doesn't have the exact same infrastructure as us. * Use an existing backend, probably user talk pages (or maybe Flow user talk pages, assuming anon talk pages are eventually converted over to this)
Matt Flaschen
On 09/11/2014 03:52 PM, Steven Walling wrote:
I'd like to propose that anywhere that I can undo or rollback an edit, I should be able to thank someone. If that location provides me enough information to revert an edit, surely it provides me enough context to show gratitude as well. With that proposal in mind, some suggestions of new locations includes...
- Watchlist
- RecentChanges
There's also Contributions.
For context:
Bug 49541 - Add thanks links on Special:Watchlist and Special:Contributions (https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49541)
There doesn't appear to be a bug for RecentChanges, yet.
Matt Flaschen