On 7/30/06, Nathaniel Sheetz preparing@psu.edu wrote:
Why the excerpt? And how would the length be determined? Including the lead might be good, but there's huge variability in size there. I'd say just include the article title.
I think it would be useful as a reference point, just to make clear that people are not "reviewing Wikipedia", but a specific article, and to make it super-easy to load the article again. User interfaces that we take for granted (highlighted tabs etc.) are not nearly as intuitive to non-regular computer users.
Would we require that they check the last box?
Good point, we might actually make the FDL assignment optional and send the e-mail even if they do not click it.
I like the email list idea. Easy to use, somewhat private, less "scary". We need to accomodate these people as much as possible, and soliciting reviews via email seems like a good way to go. We would have to make sure that we take action quickly, however--asking for feedback and then failing to act on it wouldn't do much for our image. We'd need enough volunteers to keep this running smoothly.
Making a lot of noise about this on WP should do the trick, especially if Jimmy gets behind it. ;-)
With or without email confirmation, I wonder what the noise to signal ratio will be. Worse than just the normal spam, which is easy to identify, will be the cases where malicious folks write something that to the untrained eye might pass as expert opinion but in reality is complete bunk.
Well, it's not as bad as letting everyone edit the articles, is it? ;-) If it gets too bad e-mail confirmation should take care of a lot of junk.
Erik