True. The moment you give people a tool, many people will simplistically
assume what it does or rely unthinkingly on it.
- WikiTrust might be described as "a way to see how long an edit endured
and how much trust it seems to have"; in most users' hands it'll be
"its
colored red/blue so its right/wrong."
- People won't think, they'll assume and rely.
If it is introduced, then I would suggest introducing it as a gadget for
admins and experienced users, a limited number at first. Communally, it
shouldn't be available to all, but to those who request it and seem to
understand what it shows and how to interpret it (perhaps package it with
rollback or something that gets a little scrutiny of their cluefulness?)
Thats for the future, but no harm thinking ahead. Very wary of what people
will assume it means, and that we're clear it is a tool that needs
considerable experienced interpretation and is *misleading *without it.
FT2
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 7:23 PM, David Goodman <dgoodmanny(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I am a little concerned that we are adopting a metric
into our
interface without adequate testing. Quality or trust in an article is
not a simple numerical matter, much less a rough scale of a few
categories. it will take a lot of experimentation with it until the
rest of us can decide if its valid enough to be part of our actual
interface--this is a decision that needs to be made by each community,
and I hope it will be made carefully, before we commit to it.
'What people may want to use as an add on is their affair--what we
offer to them as a gadget is something else. I'm not sure we have any
formal method for approving them, but we ought to. The WMF should not
be prescribing it for us.
That this should be done at the same time as the flagged revisions
test is yet another complication.
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 2:15 PM, FT2<ft2.wiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 6:33 PM, Erik Moeller
<erik(a)wikimedia.org>
wrote:
> 2009/8/31 FT2 <ft2.wiki(a)gmail.com>om>:
> > Yes. Incredibly useful. What I'd like would be when colors are shown,
if
> you
> > hover over some text it pops up a hover of the user who wrote it and
when
> it
> > was written (the revision).
>
> A simple version of that is already implemented. Go to
>
>
http://wikitrust.soe.ucsc.edu/index.php/Main_Page
>
> and click the "check text" tab to see it, hover over a piece of text,
> and click it. The hover shows the username, and by clicking it, you'll
> get a diff. (This may not be the latest code.)
>
> > A show/hide button on the screen, with "default status" in
preferences,
> > please. And maybe an interface issue to
consider, having a narrow top
bar
> > that doesn't scroll, where status,
flagged revision etc info can be
put
that
will always be visible no matter where you are in
the article.
There's definitely a need to consolidate the FlaggedRevs revision tag
indicator with any WikiTrust UI elements.
--
Erik Möller
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
Added a note on it here: <
http://usability.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Releases/Acai#Mini_toolbar_idea
FT2
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l