On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Dan Garry dgarry@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 13 March 2015 at 11:23, rupert THURNER rupert.thurner@gmail.com wrote:
I d like to switch to an expert view where I see the real contents of an article not just a mock up some machine generates from whatever source.
What exactly do you mean by "real contents of an article"? I'm not trying to be facetious, but there are a multitude of factors that can affect how an article looks
lol, what i mean by the contents? compared to the look? the contents is the text, not the formatting. i'd be not so keen in putting some text into an article and you censor it away ;)
I am pretty sure product management is able to design the options so that they are easy to set and do not become messy :)
See my above reply on this. The complexity of a settings interface grows exponentially with each setting added, as does the amount of support that needs to go into maintaining the product. It's not a matter of "just making it simple"; ultimate customisability comes at a cost.
that is true, and that is fair enough. in the last 15 years i did not ask for an additional setting, but i often thought to myself that the existing ones would need some reorganisation or rework.
if you do not like a setting than you might consider leaving the text as it is, and tackle the problem at source. one guideline is sufficient to get the parenthesis or this lenghty translations to a different position. it would fix the broken short-text in search engine view with it. which is anyway better than code that takes part of the information from wikidata, part it constructs itself, part is from wikipedia, some is from commons. there is no edit button or you would need 5 edit buttons and at the end everybody is confused where to edit what.
and if i find this complex the answer is "use desktop version and look on your mobile phone" *wonder*
best, rupert