It might be premature to draw any conclusions about editor response to AFT5, given it hasn't been fully rolled-out. I rarely see it as a reader (admittedly it's hard to spot on a large article with lots of citations) and I don't think I have ever seen it on pages I have edited recently (and I do look for the feedback) -- it's difficult to have an editor response to something that isn't there.
Kerry
-----Original Message----- From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of ENWP Pine Sent: Friday, 7 September 2012 6:06 AM To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities Subject: [Wiki-research-l] AFT5 regarding RJensen question
RJensen wrote in the War of 1812 email thread: "Comments: I have not seen any editor make actual use of the Article Feedback tool -- are there examples? Yes Wikipedians are very proud of their vast half-billion-person audience. However they do not ask "what features are most useful for a high school student or teacher/ a university student/ etc""
This is a very interesting question. What have been the benefits of AFT5? I have seen complaints about spam and suppressible material being written in AFT5. What benefits has it had?
With your permission, RJensen, I'll forward your question and mine to Wikimedia-l for discussion there as well.
Pine
_______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l