+1
On 8 September 2014 16:43, Ziko van Dijk zvandijk@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
a) This discussion actually belongs to a talk page on Meta or Mediawiki.org, for example :-)
b) All my experience in teaching Wikipedia tells me that the talk page system is absolutely outdated and inappropriate. It is, sorry to use this word, *ridiculous* that you have to teach people how to communicate technically in Wikipedia. I never had to explain to someone how to do that on Facebook...
As other people have pointed it out already, if you are already accustomed to the Wikipedia user interface for a longer time, you might find it difficult to fully understand what is the problem for newbies. And how big this is a problem, and how important it is to solve this problem.
Kind regards Ziko
Am Montag, 8. September 2014 schrieb Risker :
Well, I think that the "article editing" project (i.e., VE) has a huge potential for also resolving a lot of discussion space issues. I don't
see
tacking on yet another UI as being a positive for new editor introduction or retention, and cannot think of another significant site that has two such wildly divergent interfaces (one very flexible and the other very rigid in structure), except perhaps in the mobile vs. desktop situation.
I dunno, Marc. There are different expectations about signature,
depending
on the target group. We still have people being freaked out that article histories contain their username or IP (a form of automatic signature),
so
I'm not convinced that there's an expectation on the part of new users
that
anything they write anywhere will automatically be signed.
Risker/Anne
On 8 September 2014 10:24, Marc A. Pelletier <marc@uberbox.org javascript:;> wrote:
On 09/08/2014 10:18 AM, Risker wrote:
The most obvious one is automatic signing of comments, and it is something that we have technically been able to impose for years;
sinebot
didn't come into existence in a vacuum.
I suppose that's a philosophical divergence between us then - that sinebot even needs to exist to me is demonstration that the system is broken.
You say that discussion isn't all that much harder than editing
content.
Even if I agreed with that (and I do not, edit conflicts in articles are much rarer than on talk pages - and usually easier to sort out), that's not a *good* thing!
Participating in discussion should be much, *much* easier than editing articles: encouraging newbies to seek help and participate in the community *before* diving in anything but trivial article edits would
be
an immensely powerful retention tool!
(Which isn't to say that editing articles doesn't *also* need a lot of help - but that's a different project).
-- Marc
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@lists.wi...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; ?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe