Hiho,
I'm not sure about two issues.
1) In the box used for reviewing, a checkbox for watching the page is provided. I'm not sure we need that in the box in the first place, but at least it should swap places with the comment box, since the comment box belongs functionally to the upper part of the box.
2) I'm also not convinced about the usefuleness of the "stable version" button next to the article button. This is what the GUI also does and therefore, users have two ways of doing stuff, whereas both GUIs are more powerful. Shouldn't we remove that button? Also, the number of buttons has become quite large already, in particular for users with a lot of rights?
Bye,
Philipp
Thanks for the quick hack, Aaron! I came upon a second point that might make life easier for most of the users.
Those that have only editor and not reviewer rights essentially don't need the possibility to comment why they flagged a page as sighted. There shouldn't be much to discuss about this, anyhow and would result in smoother workflow for editors. This is not the case for actual reviews. Therefore, I think that only reviewers should see the comment box. Or, which sounds also nice: nobody sees the comment box at first, but if a reviewer rates an article for more than sighted, a box appears (similar to a delete-action), where he can write a comment. In particular, we could provide reviewers with a larger comment box than now.
Bye,
Philipp
Yeah, I was thinking about cutting that for a while. Note that there *is* a large comment box, but it is disabled by default (and is for all reviewer/editors when on). Also it shows on the bottom of pages when on.
The automatic [x=a,y=b] stuff in the comment can be kind of long, so I don't want long log comments though. So I may just disable comments for editors for now, as it does simplify the form.
-Aaron Schulz
From: "P. Birken" pbirken@gmail.com Reply-To: Wikimedia Quality Discussions wikiquality-l@lists.wikimedia.org To: "Wikimedia Quality Discussions" wikiquality-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikiquality-l] Usability Points Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 16:00:59 +0200
Thanks for the quick hack, Aaron! I came upon a second point that might make life easier for most of the users.
Those that have only editor and not reviewer rights essentially don't need the possibility to comment why they flagged a page as sighted. There shouldn't be much to discuss about this, anyhow and would result in smoother workflow for editors. This is not the case for actual reviews. Therefore, I think that only reviewers should see the comment box. Or, which sounds also nice: nobody sees the comment box at first, but if a reviewer rates an article for more than sighted, a box appears (similar to a delete-action), where he can write a comment. In particular, we could provide reviewers with a larger comment box than now.
Bye,
Philipp
Wikiquality-l mailing list Wikiquality-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiquality-l
_________________________________________________________________ Find a local pizza place, movie theater, and moreĀ .then map the best route! http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&ss=yp.bars~yp.pizza~yp.movie%20the...
I found one more thing:
currently, it is not possible to flag an edit when editing, except when it gets flagged automatically, which makes life very complicated.
I think the most useful way would be to provide a third checkbox to surveyors labeled "Sight edit" that allows them to sight their own edit. This would then flag the version with the minimum requirement for sighted. To avoid mistaked, this should only be possible when editing the whole page, not for section edits.
Technically this could again be done like the automatied flagging: first saving, then parsing the saved version.
Bye,
Philipp
wikiquality-l@lists.wikimedia.org