On 14 November 2012 12:42, Andreas Kolbe jayen466@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Charles Matthews charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
On 14 November 2012 00:00, Andreas Kolbe jayen466@gmail.com wrote:
And there is. Oliver's revamp of the Contact Us pages has made a huge difference, because previously, PR professionals would pass three invitations to fix the article themselves before they would come to the OTRS e-mail address.
But there is still room for improvement. OTRS e-mails should be responded to the same day, not up to four weeks later. Is anyone collecting data on how quickly OTRS mails are responded to? Are those data public? If not, there is another potential area for improvement.
What WSQ said.
Also, rethinking the "contact us" route is one thing, encouraging more people to use it early is another. The first may well be helpful, the second in current circumstances is not going to improve things. Some of your questions here are clearly for the WMF.
Charles
For better or worse, Wikipedia is the number one Google link for pretty much everything and everyone. With that comes a responsibility to get things right; a responsibility we cannot live up to, given the open editing system we've got, and the number of articles and editors we've got.
The trouble is ... we have no power over Google, do we? It is a familiar argument that you are putting.
The actual solutions are (1) to grow the community (and I mean growing it with responsible, well-trained editors). I personally have put time and effort into this in the past, as well as editing many hours a day. And (2) to make it easier for the community to do useful work.
Now the WMF is well resourced, we should really be discussing these matters. The traditional spiralling blame game set off by "case studies" is not the best way, IMX.
Charles