(cross-posting my reply from wiki-research-l)
The complete reports on WMF research on AFT5 can be found here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Article_feedback
The tool is currently deployed on a random 10% sample of English Wikipedia articles so
it's not surprising most readers/editors don't see it very often. We are currently
collecting about 4K unique feedback messages per day:
http://toolserver.org/~dartar/aft5
As for the quality of feedback – as judged by community members and readers – we have some
preliminary usage data coming from the FeedbackPage:
http://toolserver.org/~dartar/fp/ as
well as results based on blind assessment by Wikipedians that we ran during the early
stages of AFT5 research (see the "Quality assessment" sections in the research
reports above).
We will be publishing shortly an update on FeedbackPage data, but as the feature is not
rolled out on the entire project and not many editors or readers know how to find the
FeedbackPage (i.e. the only place where comments can be filtered, flagged and moderated),
these results should not be taken as conclusive.
A full roll out of AFT5 on the entire English Wikipedia is scheduled for Q4 2012.
Dario
On Sep 6, 2012, at 1:33 PM, ENWP Pine wrote:
Forwarding questions from Research-l with permission, with the hope that these will spark
discussion here on Wikimedia-l.
RJensen:
"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""
Pine:
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?
Thanks,
Pine
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l