On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 8:18 AM, Risker <risker.wp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
The dogfooding has been happening for a while on WMF's own office-wiki. We
haven't heard any results about that. Is the system being used more than
the wikitext system? (i.e., are there more "talk page" comments now than
there were before?) Have users expressed satisfaction/dissatisfaction with
the system? Have they been surveyed? Do they break down into groups
(e.g., engineering loves it, grants hates it, etc...)? I hear some stories
(including stories that suggest some groups of staff have pretty much
abandoned talk pages on office-wiki and are now reverting to emails
instead) but without any documentary evidence or analysis it's unreasonable
to think that it is either a net positive OR a net negative.
From what I remember officewiki is pretty unused by most of the staff, so
I'd
doubt you'd get much usable feedback there.
As someone who's used mediawiki for 10+ years I can say that *anything* is
better than wikitext for discussion. I have a certain bias towards LQT and
such, but that's because I actually want to use discussion pages for
discussion and wikitext is basically the worst user experience in the world
in this regard. You have a bias towards wikitext because it's been the only
option and Wikimedia wikis have weirdly embraced the functionality and
freedom it provides. Having that freedom hampered is surely painful to
powerusers, but the new user experience isn't even comparable it's so much
better.
- Ryan