Hi, this is an update on the work we in the Collaboration team are doing. Our focus is on cross-wiki notifications and other back-end improvements to that system.
Our long-term goals are to make various improvements to the Notification system.
Notifications are at the core of many different on-wiki activities. Making notifications easy to find and use can help those processes. We are focusing our immediate plans on supporting cross-wiki notifications. These will help editors stay informed about the changes they care about on every Wikimedia project on which they work. This is especially important for the editors who work on more than one wiki. Examples include if you upload to Commons, curate on Wikidata, or edit in two or more languages.
The team has spent the last few weeks researching the existing and proposed features. This has included examining existing tools such as Crosswatch. We've been considering the problems of:
* technical performance (scaling the requests across 800+ wikis), * user preferences (both existing and desired), * user interface design possibilities (how it should work), * how to release an initial, user-testable version for feedback and improvement, and * how to measure the impact of the project (reducing the time it takes to process a notification).
We are also doing user research via 1-on-1 interviews. In these we ask active editors about their current notification usage and pain-points. Using a prototype we are evolving, we get feedback on directions to take the design.
== Details and further reading == You can read more about the technical details at: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Cross-wiki_notifications .
Some of the new backend improvements to Echo: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T107823 ("Rewrite EchoNotificationFormatter") and linked tasks.
User preference options are: * https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T117670 ("Define Cross-wiki Notifications settings")
User interface design possibilities cover several questions. For example, how should cross-wiki notifications look within the pop-up? How and when should we add enhancements to the Special:Notifications page to filter things? We are drafting and discussing these in:
* https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114357 (Clarifications to the currently confusing "primary/secondary" link, and proposed future enhancements) * https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114356 (Bundled notifications) * https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115264 (Controlling notification 'volume' based on the type or location) * https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115845 (Clearer use of the notification badges (coloured number in personal toolbar)) * https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115316 (Better organization of the Special:Notifications page)
Note: Most of these are not part of the cross-wiki notifications feature. We won't for sure roll all these out together with the main change.
We started user research at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114086 and it continues at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T116741 . (Note: You can sign-up as a volunteer at https://wikimedia.org/research .)
A user-testable release is still just in planning. We decided on a Beta Feature on each wiki as the most scalable and least confusing of all the do-able options. Read our plans in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114237 ("Present cross-wiki notifications as a beta feature to users"). This will help users to try the feature anytime, disabling it if it interferes with their work in some context, and easily suggest how the tool could be improved.
There is no system for users having or setting cross-wiki preferences. Waiting to building this would take a long time. For now, we plan to let you enable the Beta Feature at each wiki on which you want to test it. This will let you have a small-scale Beta Feature that you can all try out. We will be able to discover bugs, edge-cases, iterate more, and get even more feedback. Later, when we know what features you need, we can build such a cross-wiki preferences system (including the task linked above).
Whilst you wait, we would love to hear your feedback on the above. What comments, what design ideas, and what technical concerns do you have? Please tell us on the linked tasks if you can.
I'll send further updates, when the planned Beta Feature is about to be ready.
On behalf of the Collaboration team, thank you to everyone who has given your help already.
Thank you for the update!
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Nick Wilson (Quiddity) < nwilson@wikimedia.org> wrote:
Hi, this is an update on the work we in the Collaboration team are doing. Our focus is on cross-wiki notifications and other back-end improvements to that system.
Our long-term goals are to make various improvements to the Notification system.
Notifications are at the core of many different on-wiki activities. Making notifications easy to find and use can help those processes. We are focusing our immediate plans on supporting cross-wiki notifications. These will help editors stay informed about the changes they care about on every Wikimedia project on which they work. This is especially important for the editors who work on more than one wiki. Examples include if you upload to Commons, curate on Wikidata, or edit in two or more languages.
The team has spent the last few weeks researching the existing and proposed features. This has included examining existing tools such as Crosswatch. We've been considering the problems of:
- technical performance (scaling the requests across 800+ wikis),
- user preferences (both existing and desired),
- user interface design possibilities (how it should work),
- how to release an initial, user-testable version for feedback and
improvement, and
- how to measure the impact of the project (reducing the time it takes
to process a notification).
We are also doing user research via 1-on-1 interviews. In these we ask active editors about their current notification usage and pain-points. Using a prototype we are evolving, we get feedback on directions to take the design.
== Details and further reading == You can read more about the technical details at:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Cross-wiki_notifications .
Some of the new backend improvements to Echo: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T107823 ("Rewrite EchoNotificationFormatter") and linked tasks.
User preference options are:
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T117670 ("Define Cross-wiki
Notifications settings")
User interface design possibilities cover several questions. For example, how should cross-wiki notifications look within the pop-up? How and when should we add enhancements to the Special:Notifications page to filter things? We are drafting and discussing these in:
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114357 (Clarifications to the
currently confusing "primary/secondary" link, and proposed future enhancements)
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114356 (Bundled notifications)
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115264 (Controlling notification
'volume' based on the type or location)
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115845 (Clearer use of the
notification badges (coloured number in personal toolbar))
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115316 (Better organization of
the Special:Notifications page)
Note: Most of these are not part of the cross-wiki notifications feature. We won't for sure roll all these out together with the main change.
We started user research at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114086 and it continues at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T116741 . (Note: You can sign-up as a volunteer at https://wikimedia.org/research .)
A user-testable release is still just in planning. We decided on a Beta Feature on each wiki as the most scalable and least confusing of all the do-able options. Read our plans in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114237 ("Present cross-wiki notifications as a beta feature to users"). This will help users to try the feature anytime, disabling it if it interferes with their work in some context, and easily suggest how the tool could be improved.
There is no system for users having or setting cross-wiki preferences. Waiting to building this would take a long time. For now, we plan to let you enable the Beta Feature at each wiki on which you want to test it. This will let you have a small-scale Beta Feature that you can all try out. We will be able to discover bugs, edge-cases, iterate more, and get even more feedback. Later, when we know what features you need, we can build such a cross-wiki preferences system (including the task linked above).
Whilst you wait, we would love to hear your feedback on the above. What comments, what design ideas, and what technical concerns do you have? Please tell us on the linked tasks if you can.
I'll send further updates, when the planned Beta Feature is about to be ready.
On behalf of the Collaboration team, thank you to everyone who has given your help already.
-- Nick Wilson / Quiddity
Wikitech-ambassadors mailing list Wikitech-ambassadors@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-ambassadors
Hi Nick,
Thanks for this update. I was wondering if cross-wiki watchlists are also something on the Collaboration team roadmap (since you mentioned examining Crosswatch)?
Cheers.
On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 6:21 AM, Rachel diCerbo rdicerb@wikimedia.org wrote:
Thank you for the update!
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Nick Wilson (Quiddity) < nwilson@wikimedia.org> wrote:
Hi, this is an update on the work we in the Collaboration team are doing. Our focus is on cross-wiki notifications and other back-end improvements to that system.
Our long-term goals are to make various improvements to the Notification system.
Notifications are at the core of many different on-wiki activities. Making notifications easy to find and use can help those processes. We are focusing our immediate plans on supporting cross-wiki notifications. These will help editors stay informed about the changes they care about on every Wikimedia project on which they work. This is especially important for the editors who work on more than one wiki. Examples include if you upload to Commons, curate on Wikidata, or edit in two or more languages.
The team has spent the last few weeks researching the existing and proposed features. This has included examining existing tools such as Crosswatch. We've been considering the problems of:
- technical performance (scaling the requests across 800+ wikis),
- user preferences (both existing and desired),
- user interface design possibilities (how it should work),
- how to release an initial, user-testable version for feedback and
improvement, and
- how to measure the impact of the project (reducing the time it takes
to process a notification).
We are also doing user research via 1-on-1 interviews. In these we ask active editors about their current notification usage and pain-points. Using a prototype we are evolving, we get feedback on directions to take the design.
== Details and further reading == You can read more about the technical details at:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Cross-wiki_notifications
.
Some of the new backend improvements to Echo: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T107823 ("Rewrite EchoNotificationFormatter") and linked tasks.
User preference options are:
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T117670 ("Define Cross-wiki
Notifications settings")
User interface design possibilities cover several questions. For example, how should cross-wiki notifications look within the pop-up? How and when should we add enhancements to the Special:Notifications page to filter things? We are drafting and discussing these in:
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114357 (Clarifications to the
currently confusing "primary/secondary" link, and proposed future enhancements)
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114356 (Bundled notifications)
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115264 (Controlling notification
'volume' based on the type or location)
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115845 (Clearer use of the
notification badges (coloured number in personal toolbar))
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115316 (Better organization of
the Special:Notifications page)
Note: Most of these are not part of the cross-wiki notifications feature. We won't for sure roll all these out together with the main change.
We started user research at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114086 and it continues at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T116741 . (Note: You can sign-up as a volunteer at https://wikimedia.org/research .)
A user-testable release is still just in planning. We decided on a Beta Feature on each wiki as the most scalable and least confusing of all the do-able options. Read our plans in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114237 ("Present cross-wiki notifications as a beta feature to users"). This will help users to try the feature anytime, disabling it if it interferes with their work in some context, and easily suggest how the tool could be improved.
There is no system for users having or setting cross-wiki preferences. Waiting to building this would take a long time. For now, we plan to let you enable the Beta Feature at each wiki on which you want to test it. This will let you have a small-scale Beta Feature that you can all try out. We will be able to discover bugs, edge-cases, iterate more, and get even more feedback. Later, when we know what features you need, we can build such a cross-wiki preferences system (including the task linked above).
Whilst you wait, we would love to hear your feedback on the above. What comments, what design ideas, and what technical concerns do you have? Please tell us on the linked tasks if you can.
I'll send further updates, when the planned Beta Feature is about to be ready.
On behalf of the Collaboration team, thank you to everyone who has given your help already.
-- Nick Wilson / Quiddity
Wikitech-ambassadors mailing list Wikitech-ambassadors@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-ambassadors
--
Rachel diCerbo Director of Community Engagement (Product) Wikimedia Foundation Rdicerb (WMF) <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rdicerb_%28WMF%29
@a_rachel https://twitter.com/a_rachel _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Thank goodness. Finally we might be able to start fully building out the promise of powerful, targeted and appropriate messaging that Echo always was the the kick off for. I especially like the acknowledgment of the 'volume knob'. Balancing the 'noise' of messaging is going to be really important.
I've always been a big proponent (Nick knows this all to well :D ) of investing in this area, seeing it as one of the few places of investment that can bring our communication between community members, but also the communication between foundation and editors to a level that is required to sustain and improve what we have right now, but most definitely to take our communities into the future. I predict big returns on improving this area. Awesomeness.
DJ
On 13 nov. 2015, at 23:41, Nick Wilson (Quiddity) nwilson@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi, this is an update on the work we in the Collaboration team are doing. Our focus is on cross-wiki notifications and other back-end improvements to that system.
Our long-term goals are to make various improvements to the Notification system.
Notifications are at the core of many different on-wiki activities. Making notifications easy to find and use can help those processes. We are focusing our immediate plans on supporting cross-wiki notifications. These will help editors stay informed about the changes they care about on every Wikimedia project on which they work. This is especially important for the editors who work on more than one wiki. Examples include if you upload to Commons, curate on Wikidata, or edit in two or more languages.
The team has spent the last few weeks researching the existing and proposed features. This has included examining existing tools such as Crosswatch. We've been considering the problems of:
- technical performance (scaling the requests across 800+ wikis),
- user preferences (both existing and desired),
- user interface design possibilities (how it should work),
- how to release an initial, user-testable version for feedback and
improvement, and
- how to measure the impact of the project (reducing the time it takes
to process a notification).
We are also doing user research via 1-on-1 interviews. In these we ask active editors about their current notification usage and pain-points. Using a prototype we are evolving, we get feedback on directions to take the design.
== Details and further reading == You can read more about the technical details at: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Cross-wiki_notifications .
Some of the new backend improvements to Echo: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T107823 ("Rewrite EchoNotificationFormatter") and linked tasks.
User preference options are:
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T117670 ("Define Cross-wiki
Notifications settings")
User interface design possibilities cover several questions. For example, how should cross-wiki notifications look within the pop-up? How and when should we add enhancements to the Special:Notifications page to filter things? We are drafting and discussing these in:
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114357 (Clarifications to the
currently confusing "primary/secondary" link, and proposed future enhancements)
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114356 (Bundled notifications)
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115264 (Controlling notification
'volume' based on the type or location)
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115845 (Clearer use of the
notification badges (coloured number in personal toolbar))
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115316 (Better organization of
the Special:Notifications page)
Note: Most of these are not part of the cross-wiki notifications feature. We won't for sure roll all these out together with the main change.
We started user research at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114086 and it continues at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T116741 . (Note: You can sign-up as a volunteer at https://wikimedia.org/research .)
A user-testable release is still just in planning. We decided on a Beta Feature on each wiki as the most scalable and least confusing of all the do-able options. Read our plans in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114237 ("Present cross-wiki notifications as a beta feature to users"). This will help users to try the feature anytime, disabling it if it interferes with their work in some context, and easily suggest how the tool could be improved.
There is no system for users having or setting cross-wiki preferences. Waiting to building this would take a long time. For now, we plan to let you enable the Beta Feature at each wiki on which you want to test it. This will let you have a small-scale Beta Feature that you can all try out. We will be able to discover bugs, edge-cases, iterate more, and get even more feedback. Later, when we know what features you need, we can build such a cross-wiki preferences system (including the task linked above).
Whilst you wait, we would love to hear your feedback on the above. What comments, what design ideas, and what technical concerns do you have? Please tell us on the linked tasks if you can.
I'll send further updates, when the planned Beta Feature is about to be ready.
On behalf of the Collaboration team, thank you to everyone who has given your help already.
-- Nick Wilson / Quiddity
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Agreed. If I had a binary choice between investing in Echo and investing in Flow, I would be inclined to choose Echo.
Pine On Nov 14, 2015 7:08 AM, "Derk-Jan Hartman" d.j.hartman+wmf_ml@gmail.com wrote:
Thank goodness. Finally we might be able to start fully building out the promise of powerful, targeted and appropriate messaging that Echo always was the the kick off for. I especially like the acknowledgment of the 'volume knob'. Balancing the 'noise' of messaging is going to be really important.
I've always been a big proponent (Nick knows this all to well :D ) of investing in this area, seeing it as one of the few places of investment that can bring our communication between community members, but also the communication between foundation and editors to a level that is required to sustain and improve what we have right now, but most definitely to take our communities into the future. I predict big returns on improving this area. Awesomeness.
DJ
On 13 nov. 2015, at 23:41, Nick Wilson (Quiddity) nwilson@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Hi, this is an update on the work we in the Collaboration team are doing. Our focus is on cross-wiki notifications and other back-end improvements to that system.
Our long-term goals are to make various improvements to the Notification
system.
Notifications are at the core of many different on-wiki activities. Making notifications easy to find and use can help those processes. We are focusing our immediate plans on supporting cross-wiki notifications. These will help editors stay informed about the changes they care about on every Wikimedia project on which they work. This is especially important for the editors who work on more than one wiki. Examples include if you upload to Commons, curate on Wikidata, or edit in two or more languages.
The team has spent the last few weeks researching the existing and proposed features. This has included examining existing tools such as Crosswatch. We've been considering the problems of:
- technical performance (scaling the requests across 800+ wikis),
- user preferences (both existing and desired),
- user interface design possibilities (how it should work),
- how to release an initial, user-testable version for feedback and
improvement, and
- how to measure the impact of the project (reducing the time it takes
to process a notification).
We are also doing user research via 1-on-1 interviews. In these we ask active editors about their current notification usage and pain-points. Using a prototype we are evolving, we get feedback on directions to take the design.
== Details and further reading == You can read more about the technical details at:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Cross-wiki_notifications
.
Some of the new backend improvements to Echo: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T107823 ("Rewrite EchoNotificationFormatter") and linked tasks.
User preference options are:
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T117670 ("Define Cross-wiki
Notifications settings")
User interface design possibilities cover several questions. For example, how should cross-wiki notifications look within the pop-up? How and when should we add enhancements to the Special:Notifications page to filter things? We are drafting and discussing these in:
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114357 (Clarifications to the
currently confusing "primary/secondary" link, and proposed future enhancements)
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114356 (Bundled notifications)
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115264 (Controlling notification
'volume' based on the type or location)
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115845 (Clearer use of the
notification badges (coloured number in personal toolbar))
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115316 (Better organization of
the Special:Notifications page)
Note: Most of these are not part of the cross-wiki notifications feature. We won't for sure roll all these out together with the main change.
We started user research at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114086 and it continues at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T116741 . (Note: You can sign-up as a volunteer at https://wikimedia.org/research .)
A user-testable release is still just in planning. We decided on a Beta Feature on each wiki as the most scalable and least confusing of all the do-able options. Read our plans in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T114237 ("Present cross-wiki notifications as a beta feature to users"). This will help users to try the feature anytime, disabling it if it interferes with their work in some context, and easily suggest how the tool could be improved.
There is no system for users having or setting cross-wiki preferences. Waiting to building this would take a long time. For now, we plan to let you enable the Beta Feature at each wiki on which you want to test it. This will let you have a small-scale Beta Feature that you can all try out. We will be able to discover bugs, edge-cases, iterate more, and get even more feedback. Later, when we know what features you need, we can build such a cross-wiki preferences system (including the task linked above).
Whilst you wait, we would love to hear your feedback on the above. What comments, what design ideas, and what technical concerns do you have? Please tell us on the linked tasks if you can.
I'll send further updates, when the planned Beta Feature is about to be
ready.
On behalf of the Collaboration team, thank you to everyone who has given your help already.
-- Nick Wilson / Quiddity
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Pine W wrote:
Agreed. If I had a binary choice between investing in Echo and investing in Flow, I would be inclined to choose Echo.
Can you please elaborate on why you would prioritize Echo over Flow? The Wikimedia Foundation has made the same decision and it's mind-boggling to me. I'd really like some greater insight into the thought process here.
MZMcBride
Hi MZMcBride,
The hypothetical here is that I have a binary choice between Echo and Flow. In practice it's possible to develop them in parallel. With the hypothetical in mind, I'll outline why I would prioritize Echo.
My thinking is that Echo is used widely on many, many wikis and is helpful to users of all skill levels. It must be years since I've heard someone say that they find the nature of Echo to be problematic. By contrast, the reception to Flow is more mixed. Also, as some of us are discussing with Lila, it may be feasible to extend VE to talk pages and/or give some love to the wikimarkup editor at less expense and with less disruption than the expense and disruption involved with converting talk pages to Flow pages.
From a communications persoective, I asked recently for clarification on
the status of Flow and no one from WMF answered my question. If there is so much uncertainty or disorganization with respect to Flow that users don't get answers to questions that are asked in prominent venues, that makes me wonder all the more what is happening, and therefore inclined to oppose investing more resources in a black box until community questions are answred.
Flow has its supporters and I think that keeping it maintained and healthy on wikis where the communities like it is probably wise. Given the choice of investing more resources into further development of a product that has mixed reviews, is used on only some wikis, and about which community questions aren't answered, seems questionable to me when investing in a well-accepted and widely-used tool (Echo) is an alternative.
Pine On Nov 14, 2015 9:11 PM, "MZMcBride" z@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Pine W wrote:
Agreed. If I had a binary choice between investing in Echo and investing in Flow, I would be inclined to choose Echo.
Can you please elaborate on why you would prioritize Echo over Flow? The Wikimedia Foundation has made the same decision and it's mind-boggling to me. I'd really like some greater insight into the thought process here.
MZMcBride
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Pine W wrote:
The hypothetical here is that I have a binary choice between Echo and Flow. In practice it's possible to develop them in parallel. With the hypothetical in mind, I'll outline why I would prioritize Echo.
My thinking is that Echo is used widely on many, many wikis and is helpful to users of all skill levels. It must be years since I've heard someone say that they find the nature of Echo to be problematic. By contrast, the reception to Flow is more mixed. Also, as some of us are discussing with Lila, it may be feasible to extend VE to talk pages and/or give some love to the wikimarkup editor at less expense and with less disruption than the expense and disruption involved with converting talk pages to Flow pages.
[...]
Flow has its supporters and I think that keeping it maintained and healthy on wikis where the communities like it is probably wise. Given the choice of investing more resources into further development of a product that has mixed reviews, is used on only some wikis, and about which community questions aren't answered, seems questionable to me when investing in a well-accepted and widely-used tool (Echo) is an alternative.
Hi.
Thank you for your reply. To me, it highlights and confirms a number of troubling trends and a few misconceptions that I think really need to be openly discussed and ultimately addressed. However, wikitech-l isn't the most appropriate discussion venue for this, so I'll move to wikimedia-l.
MZMcBride
The discussion about Flow that I referened is currently happening on Lila's talk page on Meta. Would you like to join the conversation there? The discussion there might get more staff attention than Wikimedia-l. (I hear a number of staff avoid Wikimedia-l because they find the tone to be hostile and/or because the volume is more than they can handle.)
By the way, staff reasoning may be quite different than mine. You may want to ask Lila about her current thinking. It would also be nice if Wes would engage in public.
Thanks,
Pine
On Sunday, November 15, 2015, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
The discussion about Flothat I referened is currently happening on Lila's talk page on Meta. Would you like to join the conversation there? The discussion there might get more staff attention than Wikimedia-l. (I hear
a
number of staff avoid Wikimedia-l because they find the tone to be hostile and/or because the volume is more than they can handle.)
You really think the staff that dont follow wikimedia-l are going to follow lila's talk page?
--bawolff
I wonder if the most effective place to have and follow conversations about a product are on that product's page, rather than Lila's Talk page or WM-L.
The main page to talk about Echo notifications overall is here: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Echo_(Notifications)
A particular problem is that that page is Flowized and I know that many users prefer original Talk pages - but the RfC page allows for Talk page format. It's here: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Requests_for_comment/Cross-wiki_notifica...
On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Brian Wolff bawolff@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, November 15, 2015, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
The discussion about Flothat I referened is currently happening on Lila's talk page on Meta. Would you like to join the conversation there? The discussion there might get more staff attention than Wikimedia-l. (I hear
a
number of staff avoid Wikimedia-l because they find the tone to be
hostile
and/or because the volume is more than they can handle.)
You really think the staff that dont follow wikimedia-l are going to follow lila's talk page?
--bawolff _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Yes, we lack efficient and effective ways of cross-listing conversations, which might be another use case for which the Collaboration team might engineer some solutions, possibly involving Echo and/or Flow. (:
On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Rachel diCerbo rdicerb@wikimedia.org wrote:
I wonder if the most effective place to have and follow conversations about a product are on that product's page, rather than Lila's Talk page or WM-L.
The main page to talk about Echo notifications overall is here: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Echo_(Notifications)
A particular problem is that that page is Flowized and I know that many users prefer original Talk pages - but the RfC page allows for Talk page format. It's here:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Requests_for_comment/Cross-wiki_notifica...
On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Brian Wolff bawolff@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, November 15, 2015, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
The discussion about Flothat I referened is currently happening on
Lila's
talk page on Meta. Would you like to join the conversation there? The discussion there might get more staff attention than Wikimedia-l. (I
hear
a
number of staff avoid Wikimedia-l because they find the tone to be
hostile
and/or because the volume is more than they can handle.)
You really think the staff that dont follow wikimedia-l are going to
follow
lila's talk page?
--bawolff _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
--
Rachel diCerbo Director of Community Engagement (Product) Wikimedia Foundation Rdicerb (WMF) <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rdicerb_%28WMF%29
@a_rachel https://twitter.com/a_rachel _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
"Yes, we lack efficient and effective ways of cross-listing conversations"
This is something we would love to address in our organization. Between email, chat, multiple wiki discussion/Flow pages, and issue trackers (like Phabricator/GitHub/GitLab), it's difficult to ensure everyone is included in the conversation and to prevent repetition across multiple conversations.
One approach we use in our wikis at NASA is to tag articles as "Related to" other articles. Then we can have a query on each page showing everything that is tagged as "Related to {{PAGENAME}}". We use Semantic MediaWiki for this, but I'm sure many other approaches could provide similar functionality. If Flow (or even core MW) could allow for a section of a page to be tagged as "Related to" other articles, you could somewhat automate linking. This would probably help people discover related conversations.
Another idea I'll throw out there is something we have submitted to a few grant proposals, called Wiki Conversations [1]. Basically, a tool allowing users to "CC" a wiki, so the content is then "wikified" and linked to related articles. So conversations like this one could be linked to the Flow and Echo discussion pages.
Daren
[1] https://youtu.be/VacHe2f1hWA
On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 8:58 PM, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, we lack efficient and effective ways of cross-listing conversations, which might be another use case for which the Collaboration team might engineer some solutions, possibly involving Echo and/or Flow. (:
On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Rachel diCerbo rdicerb@wikimedia.org wrote:
I wonder if the most effective place to have and follow conversations
about
a product are on that product's page, rather than Lila's Talk page or WM-L.
The main page to talk about Echo notifications overall is here: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Echo_(Notifications)
A particular problem is that that page is Flowized and I know that many users prefer original Talk pages - but the RfC page allows for Talk page format. It's here:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Requests_for_comment/Cross-wiki_notifica...
On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Brian Wolff bawolff@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, November 15, 2015, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
The discussion about Flothat I referened is currently happening on
Lila's
talk page on Meta. Would you like to join the conversation there? The discussion there might get more staff attention than Wikimedia-l. (I
hear
a
number of staff avoid Wikimedia-l because they find the tone to be
hostile
and/or because the volume is more than they can handle.)
You really think the staff that dont follow wikimedia-l are going to
follow
lila's talk page?
--bawolff _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
--
Rachel diCerbo Director of Community Engagement (Product) Wikimedia Foundation Rdicerb (WMF) <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rdicerb_%28WMF%29
@a_rachel https://twitter.com/a_rachel _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
It's worth a try. In any case the person who seems to be making the decisions is Lila, and since a conversation started on her talk page it seems reasonable to me to keep it there. She can move it if she wishes.
Pine
On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Brian Wolff bawolff@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, November 15, 2015, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
The discussion about Flothat I referened is currently happening on Lila's talk page on Meta. Would you like to join the conversation there? The discussion there might get more staff attention than Wikimedia-l. (I hear
a
number of staff avoid Wikimedia-l because they find the tone to be
hostile
and/or because the volume is more than they can handle.)
You really think the staff that dont follow wikimedia-l are going to follow lila's talk page?
--bawolff _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org