[WikiEN-l] Article Landing Pages - functional prototype to test and comment on

[Oliver Keyes]

> Currently, when a registered newbie clicks on a redlink, they get
> > automatically taken to an edit page where they can create the article,
> but
> > without any context as to what is actually happening.  With the proposed
> > system,  instead of seeing a blank edit window devoid of context, they'll
> > see a new page that gives them various options.[3] They can create an
> > article there, go through the article wizard, or go back to wherever they
> > were before if they didn't mean to end up at that URL.
>
>
> What sensible newbies really would need is (i) a place to draft, and (ii)
> advice on drafting.
>
In a way they've already got that through things like Articles for Creation
(which I would love to see us support better, on the software side. I can't
promise anything, though).


> If a new editor
> > tries to create the article, they'll be informed that they need a
> > familiarity with policy, an absence of a COI and several references
> > (amongst other things) before the tool recommends they create it.[4] If
> > they don't have those things, they'll be directed to the Article Creation
> > Wizard.
> >
> > I.e. you put the barriers to entry before anything else. This could be
> detrimental, you know.
>
> Quite possibly; that's why, as said below, it's an experiment. It may be
that it reduces the number of incoming articles without any substantial
increase in quality. It may be it reduces the number, but increases the
quality. It may be that by providing clearer guidance and making people
aware that they can contribute, it increases one or the other or both
without detriment. We simply don't know: but we want to find out :).

>
> > This is an experiment. Our hypothesis is that this could help increase
> the
> > quality of new articles and reduce patrollers’ workload, while making the
> > process more welcoming at the same time.
> >
>
> What is this hypothesis based on?
>
> Primarily the idea that a chunk of potential and attempted editors are
ignorant, rather than malicious; I'd hope we would all agree that this is
the case. Note that we're not deploying this; we're asking for comments on
the implementation itself so we can make it the best (or, if you disagree
with the premise, least-bad) tool it can be. Once it's developed, it'll be
deployed in a bucketed format for say, 5 percent of newbies  We can find
out if the hypothesis is accurate without overworking people.


-- 
Oliver Keyes
Community Liaison, Product Development
Wikimedia Foundation