Apparently due to some miscommunications, a lot of people didn’t realize that the FlaggedRevs labs test wiki has been active and waiting for people to poke at it for a month, since just before Wikimania!
We need interested people to be get up as local administrators to try out the the per-page stabilization settings (accessed via the ‘protect’ tab); by default most pages do not activate FlaggedRevs in the configuration we’re testing for English Wikipedia.
I’ve added a couple quick notes to this affect on the main page: http://flaggedrevs.labs.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
We're collecting some folks to be bureaucrats and help set up more test admins so we can get things going quick!
Also posted on the Wikimedia tech blog: http://techblog.wikimedia.org/2009/09/flaggedrevs-test-wiki-awaits-you/
-- brion
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Brion Vibber brion@wikimedia.org wrote:
I’ve added a couple quick notes to this affect on the main page: http://flaggedrevs.labs.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
Ah, I didn't know about this. Having a quick look now. Comments:
- It looks like the UI could do with a bit of work - it took a fair bit of poking around to work out what status a page was in. - Language should be stabilised. I see the terms "reviewed", "sighted", "draft", "stable version", "stable page", "sighted page"...but not "flagged revision". We should use as few terms as possible and use them consistently. - Clicking the +/- shows some escaped HTML code (<revreview-status&qt;) - For that matter "+/-" seems much less obvious to me than a simple "+" - A red padlock, an eyeball, the term "sighted page", and the word "view draft". Whoa. Too much. Way too much. - There's a "draft" tab and an "edit draft" tab. - On the NYC article, I created vandalism but it was "automatically sighted". Clicking the "automatically sighted" text just took me back to the article. - (Heh, that was confusing, I placed a request for admin, and it got approved, all within a minute or two...totally changing my experience of the system) - The admin interface is awkward too, especially having to go through protect and that "flagged revisions can also be [[configured]]" bit... - Having the tabs at the top change depending on the status of the page is confusing. Sometimes you have "page" and "edit". Sometimes you have "stable page", "draft" and "edit draft". Maybe tabs aren't the way to go here.
My overall impressions are that this adds a LOT of complexity. The mental model needed to work in this area is counterintuitive and just damn complex. I find the icons in the top right confusing more than anything.
Before: You have a page, some previous versions, and a talk page. After: You have lots of versions of a page. There may be a stable page, a sighted page, a reviewed page. Or not. You might be looking at a draft (in which case the stable version is older), or you might be looking at a stable version (vice versa).
So, please let's not inflict this on en without making a few decent improvements to the user experience.
Steve
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 9:23 PM, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
So, please let's not inflict this on en without making a few decent improvements to the user experience.
Absolutely. I think a lot of clarity can be added just by changing the interface text... Sighted? Wtf is that.
There is a page on the wiki collecting comments, please add yours:
http://flaggedrevs.labs.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia:FlaggedRevs_issues
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com wrote:> There is a page on the wiki collecting comments, please add yours:
Done.
One thing that makes testing this thing quite difficult is that the experience for admins and non-admins is very different. In particular if you're an admin, every change you make is auto-reviewed. You really need to have two browsers open to do any playing.
Steve
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 11:06 PM, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com wrote:> There is a page on the wiki collecting comments, please add yours:
Done.
One thing that makes testing this thing quite difficult is that the experience for admins and non-admins is very different. In particular if you're an admin, every change you make is auto-reviewed. You really need to have two browsers open to do any playing.
I had originally thought there was some checkbox in flagged revs that you could hit to suppress the autoflagging of your own edit (like the minor edit box) but I don't see it in the code.
Is this a feature we'd like beyond simple testing?
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 11:23 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 11:06 PM, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com wrote:> There is a page on the wiki collecting comments, please add yours:
Done.
One thing that makes testing this thing quite difficult is that the experience for admins and non-admins is very different. In particular if you're an admin, every change you make is auto-reviewed. You really need to have two browsers open to do any playing.
I had originally thought there was some checkbox in flagged revs that you could hit to suppress the autoflagging of your own edit (like the minor edit box) but I don't see it in the code.
Is this a feature we'd like beyond simple testing?
Oh— it's there. Hmph. I could have sworn it wasn't.
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 8:24 PM, Brion Vibber brion@wikimedia.org wrote:
Apparently due to some miscommunications, a lot of people didn’t realize that the FlaggedRevs labs test wiki has been active and waiting for people to poke at it for a month, since just before Wikimania!
We need interested people to be get up as local administrators to try out the the per-page stabilization settings (accessed via the ‘protect’ tab); by default most pages do not activate FlaggedRevs in the configuration we’re testing for English Wikipedia.
I’ve added a couple quick notes to this affect on the main page: http://flaggedrevs.labs.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
We're collecting some folks to be bureaucrats and help set up more test admins so we can get things going quick!
Also posted on the Wikimedia tech blog: http://techblog.wikimedia.org/2009/09/flaggedrevs-test-wiki-awaits-you/
-- brion
Can the templates from enwiki (at least those in use) be imported to the test wiki? It's important to look at the flagged revs, together with templates, to make sure the css stylings don't conflict between what's used in the infoboxes and what's used in the flagged rev interface elements.
On the Arabic Wikipedia, which is using flagged revisions, I have found many pages where the infobox together with the flagged revs mw-revisiontag (sighted/draft) div in the corner cause the infobox to be displaced on the page.
Examples:
http://bit.ly/17anh9 (October 2 - arwiki calendar page) http://bit.ly/3zfe5x (Polonium - arwiki element page) http://bit.ly/1cR7J4 (Jurassic Park 2 - arwiki page)
(Note: I haven't had the time to look into this and find where exactly the bug is, and help fix it. I am curious if it's happening only on arwiki or a more widespread problem)
It would be good know if this might be a problem on enwiki, by testing with templates on the test wiki.
-Aude
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:44 AM, Aude aude.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Can the templates from enwiki (at least those in use) be imported to the test wiki? It's important to look at the flagged revs, together with templates, to make sure the css stylings don't conflict between what's used in the infoboxes and what's used in the flagged rev interface elements.
The ones in use are supposed to be imported but some were not.
On the Arabic Wikipedia, which is using flagged revisions, I have found many pages where the infobox together with the flagged revs mw-revisiontag (sighted/draft) div in the corner cause the infobox to be displaced on the page.
I think the styling of the high visibility flagged revs mv-revisiontag is bad for usability:
It's by far one of the most visible thing on a typical articles. While I'm sure that mv-revisiontag is great important to flagged revs developers I don't think it's *that* important to editors and especially readers. It's certainly not more important than the edit and history tabs which it is 1000x more visible than. Perhaps it should be moved down and become a component of the review box at the top of the article, keeping no more than a tab and/or icon at the top of the page?