Mh. Is this actually leading anywhere? I can see both views, but there
is a danger that things are getting non-constructive here. A particular
issue in my view is playing the "Wikipedia-vs-Wikidata" card. I don't
see things in this way, and I hope most Wikipedia and Wikidata editors
don't either.
Of course there are different interfaces and different pitfalls for each
system. Let's face it: both are far from perfect when it comes to UI.
People use them because they are extremely important projects, in spite
-- not because -- of the UIs. I have also read about missing
documentation on how to do things. Again, I don't think either project
really shines here. There often is documentation if you know where to
look, but if you just come by the page and want to work, it is very
difficult to find it. Things could be much better.
Therefore, any approach that looks only at current editors (who already
have made a lot of effort to wrap their heads around one of the
not-always-intuitive processes and interfaces) is necessarily too
limited. Their tolerance to the "other" UI will be as low as anybody's
(ask someone on the street how nice they find either template editing or
Wikidata input forms -- you'll get similar views). At the same time,
current users often have a kind of Stockholm syndrome towards the UI
they are used to. We have to take their views very serious, but we must
not build our sites only for the people who already use them now.
The question therefore is not at all which of the current UIs is better,
but rather how both can be improved. For this list, this mainly leads to
the question how Wikidata can be improved. The practical insights
gathered with different editor groups around the world are useful here.
The findings need to be split into small, actionable units and
prioritized. Then they will be fixed.
For this to work, it is completely irrelevant if more people like one UI
or more people like the other. Since the UIs are doing completely
different things, we won't be able to replace one by the other anyway.
All we can do is to improve on our side. For this reason, any
"vs"-themed discussion can only be harmful, attracting trolls who love
to chime in whenever there is critique, and frustrate contributors who
would rather like to get things done than to argue.
As for the (little) project that started this discussion, I think it
should not be overrated in its scope. If people don't find the current
UI usable enough, they will not switch to use it until we have our
processes improved. But having other pieces of the puzzle in place will
increase the pressure on Wikidata to fix remaining pain points, and
possibly do exactly what Erika is asking for: make the voice of current
Wikipedia editors (even) more relevant to ongoing Wikidata development.
Peace,
Markus
On 03.08.2016 19:24, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
Brill Lyle, 03/08/2016 19:20:
I am not saying editing Wiki Markup on Wikidata.
Is that what you are
describing?
No.
Nemo
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata