On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 1:28 AM, Pete Forsyth peteforsyth@gmail.com wrote:
I think it is much more likely that a Wikipedia reader would expect to find those images *used in Wikipedia articles* than a massive collection of stuff that is somehow tangentially related to Wikipedia in a way that they don't fully understand.
So why on earth does the main "multimedia" search link on Wikipedia automatically return unused results from Commons to begin with? Is that really the right way to go?
I'm breaking out this question since it's a concrete technical proposal; it should probably also be raised on the multimedia list. But we should answer it from the perspective "What's best for the user", rather than have it be driven solely by the NSFW corner case (which may also appear when searching images used on a project like en.wp alone).
As a user, I might want to find images to add to an article. Having results from the central repository presented locally makes it easier to do so without visiting a separate site. (Consider this from the perspective of smaller projects especially, where the local search would be pretty much useless.) This is why VisualEditor presents Commons search results, as well.
As a user, I might be interested in multimedia about a certain topic I just read about in Wikipedia. Showing only the results already in the Wikipedia article(s) about the topic would make it harder to find such media. Simple example: Let's say I read an article about a city, and I want to find other historic maps of that city. In many cases, these maps do exist on Commons but not locally. Should we therefore force people to visit Commons to find them?
I would argue that from the ordinary user's perspective, the distinction between Wikipedia/Commons is less important than what they have in common, i.e. being large repositories of useful educational content (and hyperbole aside, 99% of Commons is pretty boring stuff).
We could default to displaying locally used media and offer to search Commons with an extra click. From a usability perspective, you want to minimize the steps a user has to take, so good UX design would likely disclose results from Commons either a) always, clearly labeled or b) when no local results are available.
There's no question that search UX, both on Commons and on Wikipedia, can be improved. I'm just skeptical that an unbiased evaluation of the user experience using standard UX heuristics would lead to a design that hides explicit content from initial search results. Distinguish different types of content more clearly and make it easier to find the stuff you want - sure, that's doable.
Erik
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 1:25 PM, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 1:28 AM, Pete Forsyth peteforsyth@gmail.com wrote:
I think it is much more likely that a Wikipedia reader would expect to
find
those images *used in Wikipedia articles* than a massive collection of stuff that is somehow tangentially related to Wikipedia in a way that
they
don't fully understand.
So why on earth does the main "multimedia" search link on Wikipedia automatically return unused results from Commons to begin with? Is that really the right way to go?
I'm breaking out this question since it's a concrete technical proposal; it should probably also be raised on the multimedia list. But we should answer it from the perspective "What's best for the user", rather than have it be driven solely by the NSFW corner case (which may also appear when searching images used on a project like en.wp alone).
As a user, I might want to find images to add to an article. Having results from the central repository presented locally makes it easier to do so without visiting a separate site. (Consider this from the perspective of smaller projects especially, where the local search would be pretty much useless.) This is why VisualEditor presents Commons search results, as well.
As a user, I might be interested in multimedia about a certain topic I just read about in Wikipedia. Showing only the results already in the Wikipedia article(s) about the topic would make it harder to find such media. Simple example: Let's say I read an article about a city, and I want to find other historic maps of that city. In many cases, these maps do exist on Commons but not locally. Should we therefore force people to visit Commons to find them?
I would argue that from the ordinary user's perspective, the distinction between Wikipedia/Commons is less important than what they have in common, i.e. being large repositories of useful educational content (and hyperbole aside, 99% of Commons is pretty boring stuff).
We could default to displaying locally used media and offer to search Commons with an extra click. From a usability perspective, you want to minimize the steps a user has to take, so good UX design would likely disclose results from Commons either a) always, clearly labeled or b) when no local results are available.
There's no question that search UX, both on Commons and on Wikipedia, can be improved. I'm just skeptical that an unbiased evaluation of the user experience using standard UX heuristics would lead to a design that hides explicit content from initial search results. Distinguish different types of content more clearly and make it easier to find the stuff you want - sure, that's doable.
With Cirrus (the "New Seach" beta feature) both marking stuff from commons as from commons and adding a tick box to remove stuff from commons would also be possible. Marking would be easier but both wouldn't be too hard. We could even artificially push results that are on the local wiki higher then those on commons.
I know its a horrible excuse, but we're spinning up a project to rework the search page's user interface. It hasn't something like that since tables in table in tables was normal. We've been talking about this. The project is still in the "those a pretty mock ups" stage and it has been moving slowly.
Nik
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 1:28 AM, Pete Forsyth peteforsyth@gmail.com wrote:
I think it is much more likely that a Wikipedia reader would expect to
find
those images *used in Wikipedia articles* than a massive collection of stuff that is somehow tangentially related to Wikipedia in a way that
they
don't fully understand.
So why on earth does the main "multimedia" search link on Wikipedia automatically return unused results from Commons to begin with? Is that really the right way to go?
I'm breaking out this question since it's a concrete technical proposal; it should probably also be raised on the multimedia list. But we should answer it from the perspective "What's best for the user", rather than have it be driven solely by the NSFW corner case (which may also appear when searching images used on a project like en.wp alone).
As a user, I might want to find images to add to an article. Having results from the central repository presented locally makes it easier to do so without visiting a separate site. (Consider this from the perspective of smaller projects especially, where the local search would be pretty much useless.) This is why VisualEditor presents Commons search results, as well.
As a user, I might be interested in multimedia about a certain topic I just read about in Wikipedia. Showing only the results already in the Wikipedia article(s) about the topic would make it harder to find such media. Simple example: Let's say I read an article about a city, and I want to find other historic maps of that city. In many cases, these maps do exist on Commons but not locally. Should we therefore force people to visit Commons to find them?
I would argue that from the ordinary user's perspective, the distinction between Wikipedia/Commons is less important than what they have in common, i.e. being large repositories of useful educational content (and hyperbole aside, 99% of Commons is pretty boring stuff).
We could default to displaying locally used media and offer to search Commons with an extra click. From a usability perspective, you want to minimize the steps a user has to take, so good UX design would likely disclose results from Commons either a) always, clearly labeled or b) when no local results are available.
There's no question that search UX, both on Commons and on Wikipedia, can be improved. I'm just skeptical that an unbiased evaluation of the user experience using standard UX heuristics would lead to a design that hides explicit content from initial search results. Distinguish different types of content more clearly and make it easier to find the stuff you want - sure, that's doable.
Erik
Thanks Erik, this all sounds like a very reasonable and welcome approach. I certainly don't think my proposal is "complete," and as I indicated I don't have the capability to do the required user research, but would hope this idea could be a useful prompt for charting of a path forward.
Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]]
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org