IRC office hours/Office hours 2012-07-18b

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

[6:04pm] fabriceflorin: Hello everyone, good to see you again. Look forward to discussing article feedback with you all today!
[6:04pm] Apheori: Also, whoever it was who said we should be able to sort out positive stuff missed the fact that positive stuff can contain constructive criticism.
[6:04pm] Fluffernutter: hi fabrice :)
[6:04pm] Excirial joined the chat room.
[6:04pm] Apheori: At least, it does in the insane world I'm from.
[6:05pm] Ironholds: welcome, Excirial :)
[6:05pm] Ironholds: here for office hours?
[6:05pm] fabriceflorin: Hey fluffernutter, were you at Wikimania ? If so, I'm so sad I missed you :(
[6:05pm] Ironholds: Apheori: what do you mean sort out positive stuff?
[6:05pm] Apheori: Someone wanted to filter out positive feedback.
[6:06pm] Excirial: Just for my evening meal of AFC article's. But if there is an office hour, i always listen in :)
[6:06pm] Apheori: mabdul: What line was this?
[6:06pm] • Apheori greets fabriceflorin with a handful of dead plant.
[6:06pm] Ironholds: Apheori: aha! Well, you can do it - that is, you can see a list of "only bad stuff"
[6:06pm] Ironholds: but that can be useful if you see your role as "going through to hide things people find damaging"
[6:06pm] fabriceflorin: Hey Apheori thanks for the plants - dead or not, I appreciate the gesture ;o)
[6:06pm] mabdul: Apheori: no at Special:Contribution is the article feedback listed...
[6:07pm] Fluffernutter: fabriceflorin, yeah. I caught sight of you a few times but somehow managed to never meet you
[6:07pm] Apheori: Couldn't there be damaging stuff in the other stuff?
[6:07pm] Apheori: Oooh.
[6:08pm] Apheori: So what do you want to hide?
[6:08pm] Apheori: Or whatever it was.
[6:08pm] Excirial: Article feedback tool office hours? Always nice.
[6:08pm] Excirial: Though that banner on the Wiki increased the amount of garbage reactions threefold. :P
[6:09pm] Ironholds: Excirial: garbage reactions? :)
[6:09pm] Excirial: "Poop"
[6:09pm] Excirial: "sex"
[6:09pm] Ironholds: Apheori: there could be, but we're hoping that people will mark those accordingly and they'll go in the other list
[6:09pm] Ironholds: Excirial: ooh. how did it do that? It's only shown to logged-in people
[6:09pm] Excirial: "Yes can i have her contact number i am a big fan plz!?!?!"
[6:09pm] fabriceflorin: Hello Excirial, good to meet you! I'm sorry to hear that you think the banner decreased the quality of the feedback. Hopefully that will not be an ongoing issue ...
[6:09pm] Ironholds: and for reference, if you think sex is garbage you no longer have a soul ;)
[6:10pm] Excirial: Ill save:D
[6:10pm] Ironholds: and I will personally hold a weepy prayer vigil for you ;p
[6:10pm] Ironholds: there'll be candles and everything, it'll be nice
[6:10pm] Fluffernutter: always time for a good weepy vigil
[6:10pm] Excirial: Ironholds... Why do you manage to play my words around so well? :P
[6:10pm] fabriceflorin: Does anyone have questions about the current version of Article Feedback? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ArticleFeedbackv5
[6:10pm] Ironholds: I know, right? I don't think we have enough proper ceremonies in the movement
[6:10pm] Ironholds: Excirial: I've got a law degree and work in communications
[6:10pm] Ironholds: It is quite literally my job :P
[6:10pm] fabriceflorin: … or suggestions for improvement?
[6:10pm] Ironholds: not usually in this fashion, mind you
[6:10pm] Excirial: (Fluffernutter, help me, melt on a bot! anything to distract iron :D)
[6:11pm] Ironholds: anyway; we should move on :). Anyone got questions, suggestions for improvement, issues they want to bring up?
[6:11pm] Ironholds: I'd be really interested to see what people thought of the kickass landing page heatherw built for us :)
[6:11pm] Ironholds: anything it should be telling editors that it isn't?
[6:11pm] heatherw: lol
[6:11pm] Fluffernutter: Ironholds, i saw the comment someone left...somewhere...about how currently "oversight requested" items are viewable to anyone
[6:11pm] Fluffernutter: is that going to change?
[6:11pm] Ironholds: Fluffernutter: yeah, fabriceflorin and I were just discussing that
[6:12pm] Ironholds: TL;DR we're speaking to people who are speaking to people, and should hopefully have a resolution soon
[6:12pm] Apheori: fabriceflorin: It's confusng.
[6:12pm] Fluffernutter: cool
[6:12pm] mabdul: fabriceflorin: add either a class/id to the special contributions line so that we can hide with a CSS hack the feedback (as requested) or simply store this data in another DB similar to the Dashboard
[6:12pm] Ironholds: a resolution being "We will fix this in X days!" or "We will not fix this because", not necessarily "dun"
[6:12pm] Ironholds: mabdul: that sounds like a request for the devs :). matthiasmullie?
[6:12pm] mabdul: heh
[6:13pm] Ironholds: anyway, Fluffernutter: the important thing to remember is if it doesn't get fixed, it is James_F's fault.
[6:13pm] Ironholds: not mine, his. Definitely his.
[6:13pm] Fluffernutter: But he's so much less pleasant to harass :(
[6:13pm] Ironholds: ugh. I can't *stand* people like you.
[6:13pm] Apheori: What about sit?
[6:13pm] Ironholds: you go around enjoying poking people and making fun of them
[6:13pm] Ironholds: who does that?
[6:14pm] fabriceflorin: Fluffernutter: In an earlier discussion with Philippe, Oliver and a number of editors, we had agreed to keep oversight requests on the central feedback page for now, but not any other oversight-related items. Our conclusion was that it was better to make these available on the central feedback page, so anyone could address them, since the majority of them don't appear to require oversight.
[6:14pm] Ironholds: Apheori: occasionally, she is the right height for a chair
[6:14pm] fabriceflorin: But we are certainly open to revisiting that decision if we see a consensus emerge that we should change that approach.
[6:14pm] Ironholds: fabriceflorin: I've definitely seen a lot of comments about it
[6:14pm] Ironholds: one moment while I pull up the particular thread
[6:14pm] Apheori: Ironholds: Not for you.
[6:14pm] Fluffernutter: fabriceflorin: seems to me it might be a legal-ish sort of issue - if someone believes there's privacy-related info in something, it should probably be hidden until that's evaluated
[6:15pm] matthiasmullie: mabdul: I'll add a seperate class to it by next week
[6:15pm] Ironholds: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Article_Feedback_Tool/Version_5#Remove_the_oversight_requested_and_oversight_denied_filters.3F - there we are
[6:15pm] jps: do logged in users get filters that logged out users don't see?
[6:15pm] Apheori: Perhaps it should be made clearer what all these buttons actually do?
[6:15pm] Ironholds: Apheori: I'm not *that* short. you're just taller than average.
[6:15pm] Apheori: And what they're for?
[6:15pm] Ironholds: jps: they do; filters depend on the userrights
[6:15pm] Apheori: And in a way that doesn't require reading an excess of documentation...
[6:15pm] Ironholds: so, for example, non-oversighters can't see oversighted things
[6:16pm] fabriceflorin: Yes, we discussed this with the WMF legal group, including Philippe and Geoff, and we had reached an understanding on this issue. But we can bring it back up to them to see if they have a different view now. In any case, this is duly noted and we will follow up on this.
[6:16pm] Ironholds: Apheori: can you point me to a specific example of a button you find confusing? and have you seen the walkthrough?
[6:16pm] • Fluffernutter goes to comment there
[6:16pm] Ironholds: dammit
[6:16pm] Ironholds: I knew I shouldn't have told people about it
[6:16pm] Ironholds: now you're all going to say useful things and I'll have to do *work* :(
[6:17pm] jvandavier joined the chat room.
[6:17pm] Apheori: Ironholds: All of them?
[6:17pm] Apheori: The things at very least need tooltips.
[6:17pm] Ironholds: Apheori: and the walkthrough? I find it fairly easy; heatherw built a great designt hat splits it up
[6:17pm] Apheori: What walkthrough?
[6:17pm] Apheori: Why does it need a walkthrough?
[6:17pm] Ironholds: tooltips are a good idea. fabriceflorin, your feelings?
[6:17pm] Ironholds: Apheori: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Feedback_walkthrough
[6:18pm] Ironholds: hat tip to heatherw for the lack of "oh my god this wiki page makes me want to claw my eyes out"
[6:18pm] Apheori: What's with all the block of text on one side and the empty space on the other?
[6:18pm] mabdul: matthiasmullie: great, then the hiding is really easy...
[6:18pm] Apheori: Actually, Ironholds...
[6:18pm] Ironholds: Apheori: subseqent pages split it up. But if you find it annoying or inconsistent, I'm happy to tweak it
[6:19pm] Apheori: Well, I think the main problem is actually just that it doesn't fit on my screen.
[6:19pm] Ironholds: ooh
[6:19pm] fabriceflorin: Have any of you started to see feedback appear on pages you are currently editing? Now that we are deployed to 5% of en-wiki, you have a 1 in 20 chance of having feedback enabled on your articles. (To see if an article has feedback, click on the Talk page and look for a 'Reader feedback' link next to its title.)
[6:19pm] mabdul: Ironholds: what is the actual status: how many pages (%) has it now and are there plans to expand it to - say - all pages?
[6:19pm] Ironholds: mabdul: it's 5 percent at the moment; we're going to 10 percent next week, I believe?
[6:20pm] matthiasmullie: indeed
[6:20pm] Ironholds: for 100 percent we need to make sure it's scaleable and suchlike, which will take a bit more time. fabriceflorin, you're the project manager; what's the ETA on that? :)
[6:20pm] Apheori: But yeah, a) that's a lot to read, and b) what about the most common case, meh feedback? It's not really good or bad... what do people do with that?
[6:20pm] Ironholds: Apheori: so, what do you mean by meh? just "this is awesome", or strings of gibberish, or...
[6:20pm] mabdul: and the second part of the question?
[6:20pm] mabdul: err
[6:20pm] mabdul: *scrolling down*
[6:21pm] Apheori: Or the word 'fuck' or stuff that may have been put on completely the wrong article...
[6:21pm] matthiasmullie: ETA for 100% is mid september
[6:21pm] fabriceflorin: Ironholds, we are aiming for a mid-September deployment to 100% of en-wiki, if all goes well. We have to do some code re-factoring and add scaleability features in the next two months, though ...
[6:21pm] Ironholds: Apheori: if it's offensive, I'd hide it
[6:21pm] Apheori: But we don't rvdel offense usually.
[6:21pm] Ironholds: Apheori: indeed. There's a big discussion about moving away from revdel as the standard
[6:22pm] Ironholds: it's community-orientated so I'm trying not to get too involved, but..you want a link?
[6:22pm] xlorm left the chat room. (Quit: xlorm)
[6:22pm] fabriceflorin: Apheori: I'm always in favor of tooltips when possible. Where where you thinking they might be most useful again?
[6:22pm] Ironholds: fabriceflorin: I believe she meant the buttons on the AFT5 page
[6:22pm] xlorm joined the chat room.
[6:22pm] mabdul: and (just for the case) who should 'maintain' and review all these feedbacks? will there be placed a link at the talkpage/actual page to get feedback for only a certian page? (for the case somebody is improving a particular page)
[6:23pm] Apheori: Anywhere with buttons. What they actually do, what the implications are, or when to use them could be quite useful...
[6:23pm] Apheori: Like what does 'oversight' actually mean, or a very brief description of what the little thumby icons do, and a note on when to hide...
[6:23pm] Ironholds: mabdul: there are actually talkpage links! :)
[6:23pm] chrismcmahon joined the chat room.
[6:23pm] chrismcmahon left the chat room. (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
[6:23pm] fabriceflorin: Ironholds: Thanks! Do you mean the AFT5 landing page? ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Article_feedback) … or the project overview page? ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Article_Feedback_Tool/Version_5 )
[6:23pm] Ironholds: Apheori: for those that involve extra actions, like oversight, it does provide guidance when you click on the button and the little window pops oout
[6:23pm] Apheori: Ironholds: I don't even understand what revdel is for.
[6:24pm] mabdul: Ironholds: mmmh, I'm active at the 95% then ^^
[6:24pm] Apheori: Or rather why there are still both that and oversight.
[6:24pm] Ironholds: fabriceflorin: neither, the AFT5 page. Special:ArticleFeedbackv5
[6:24pm] ArloJamesBarnes: out
[6:24pm] ArloJamesBarnes left the chat room. (Quit: Page closed)
[6:24pm] Apheori: Clicking buttons is scary, though. Having a note before clicking is much more reassuring.
[6:24pm] Ironholds: Apheori: yeah, I get your point. I'll look into it :).
[6:24pm] Ironholds: that's a really good point, actually
[6:24pm] Fluffernutter: omg Ironholds the filters work for me again! woohoo!2
[6:24pm] Ironholds: if you've never clicked it then you don't KNOW it doesn't immediately take an action
[6:24pm] • Ironholds headdesks
[6:24pm] Apheori: I was just clicking random things wondering what's this do? What's this do?
[6:25pm] Ironholds: I should've thought of that
[6:25pm] Ironholds: thanks Apheori
[6:25pm] Apheori: You're welcome.
[6:25pm] Apheori: Some do immediately take actions, too, so aye...
[6:25pm] Apheori: Crap, I seem to have run out of fungicide.
[6:26pm] mabdul: matthiasmullie: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Article_feedback <-- do use "CSS buttons" - i clicked twice on them until i noticed that there is only a link
[6:26pm] Fluffernutter: ok wait...ironholds, everything is working for me now on the OS end. Everything!! Something got fixed somewhere!
[6:26pm] • Fluffernutter does a little dance
[6:26pm] Ironholds: Fluffernutter: yay!
[6:26pm] Ironholds: I'll tell Chris :)
[6:26pm] fabriceflorin: Thanks for the clarification. I didn't realize you were referring to the Central Feedback page. Yes, I agree with Apheori's recommendation that we add tooltips for the buttons on that page. That makes perfect sense, and is easy to do. Let's plan to file a feature request for this.
[6:27pm] Ironholds: shall do :)
[6:27pm] Ironholds: I'll do my standard review-of-the-logs when we're done and extract any potential enhancements or bugs for discussion
[6:27pm] Fluffernutter: (crap, I take it back. I can do everything from the list view, Ironholds, but still not from the details view)
[6:27pm] mabdul: Ironholds: maybe I'm stupid but at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Blackburn_(aeronautical_engineer) nor at the talkpage I see a link to the feedback given to that article. Maybe it is my custom CSS; but where should it normally appear?
[6:27pm] fabriceflorin: Ironholds: Thanks, that would be great!
[6:28pm] Ironholds: Fluffernutter: excellent!
[6:28pm] Ironholds: not that it doesn't work
[6:28pm] Ironholds: but excellent that we have nuance in the bug
[6:28pm] Ironholds: mabdul: vun moment
[6:28pm] fabriceflorin: Fluffernutter: I am SOOOO HAPPY that things are working well for you now. We were all bummed to hear you were having issues.
[6:28pm] Ironholds: mabdul: so, it should be next to the title on the talkpage
[6:28pm] Ironholds: fabriceflorin: she just reported it's still broken, just in a different way
[6:28pm] Fluffernutter: but being broken differently is progress :D
[6:29pm] fabriceflorin: Fluffernutter: What are the issues you are experiencing on the permalink page?
[6:29pm] matthiasmullie: fabriceflorin: can you look into the css buttons with heather? (as mentionned by mabdul)
[6:29pm] Fluffernutter: none of the links (except "view old version") do anything, fabriceflorin. I can click them until the cows come home, but nothing happens.
[6:29pm] Ironholds: matthiasmullie: mabdul does mention scripts and suchlike. mabdul, could you email me browser info, common.js etc and any gadgets so we have a full thing to look at?
[6:30pm] Ironholds: that way we can replicate and check if the problem is at our end or yours.
[6:30pm] mabdul: Ironholds: maybe I'm stupid but even with the starnard monobook http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ken%20Blackburn%20(aeronautical%20engineer)&useskin=monobook I don't see it...
[6:30pm] Fajro: I have a problem with the Rate this page"
[6:30pm] Fajro: feedback
[6:30pm] Apheori: Be nice if the contributions included a link to the page the feedback is on, as opposed to just the feedback itself.
[6:30pm] fabriceflorin: (note to self: we should now use the word 'Details' page in our documentation, instead of permalink page, now that we changed the label)
[6:30pm] jps: are there signs of load so far that indicate you'll need more hardware for 100% v5 coverage?
[6:31pm] Ironholds: mabdul: huh! Okay, send everything through to me as commented, thanks :)
[6:31pm] Ironholds: Fajro: what's the issue?
[6:31pm] mabdul: Ironholds: I haven't modified the monobook since I'm using normally modern; so I don't see it
[6:31pm] Apheori: And if the feedback details linked to the relevant page in general, as opposed to just the revision...
[6:31pm] Ironholds: mabdul: but do you have common.js or modern.js?
[6:31pm] mabdul: modern.js
[6:31pm] Ironholds: fabriceflorin: you got an answer for jps?
[6:31pm] mabdul: modern.css
[6:31pm] matthiasmullie: Ironholds: I was talking about "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Article_feedback <-- do use "CSS buttons" - i clicked twice on them until i noticed that there is only a link" (the Wikipedia:Article_Feedback page)
[6:31pm] Ironholds: mabdul: and no gadgets through the prefs?
[6:31pm] heatherw: matthiasmullie: *nod
[6:31pm] Ironholds: matthiasmullie: ohh, headdesk. different bug!
[6:31pm] mabdul: no gadgets? no aft related
[6:31pm] Ironholds: sorry
[6:31pm] fabriceflorin: Hi Fajro: You should not be seeing any 'Rate this page' for the current version of Article Feedback v5. You may be looking at the old version (AFTv4). Try looking at this page, which should not have any mentions of rating: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ArticleFeedbackv5/Golden-crowned_Sparrow
[6:32pm] Apheori: Also be nice if the 'post your feedback' button on the page itself were legible.
[6:32pm] matthiasmullie: the other one is going on my list, yes ;)
[6:32pm] Ironholds: Apheori: mind sending me a screenshot of what the issue is with that?
[6:32pm] Apheori: I think I did a few months ago.
[6:32pm] Fajro: in the "Well-written" part sometimes my answer would be: "mmm... I don't know, but something is wrong with this text" there is no star for that :P
[6:32pm] Apheori: But seriously, that's hard.
[6:33pm] Apheori: Can I just tell you my browser and see if you can replicate?
[6:33pm] fabriceflorin: jps: There are no signs of load or performance issues that we know of at this time -- at the 5% level. Next week, we will bump it up to 10% and see if there are any issues.
[6:34pm] Apheori: If I turn up my screen brightness it becomes legible, actually, but still difficult.
[6:34pm] Ironholds: fabriceflorin: are we predicting any issues at 100, actually?
[6:34pm] matthiasmullie: mabdul: what browser are you using?
[6:34pm] Ironholds: Apheori: I don't have any emails from you :(
[6:34pm] Nathan2055 joined the chat room.
[6:35pm] Fajro: fabriceflorin: this new version is much better. :)
[6:35pm] fabriceflorin: Apheori, what if instead of sending you to the 'Details' permalink page to see a comment, we sent you to the article feedback page itself, with that comment shown on top?
[6:35pm] mabdul: matthiasmullie: beat me: opera ^^
[6:35pm] mabdul: 64bit, 764bit
[6:36pm] MartijnH joined the chat room.
[6:36pm] fabriceflorin: Fajro: Thanks, glad you like the new version better. We found that the ratings were not as effective for improving the page than asking readers if they 'found what they were looking for', then asking them for suggestions for improvement.
[6:36pm] Fluffernutter: Ironholds/fabriceflorin: When do items move from "oversight requested" to "oversighted" or "oversight declined"? I just did a couple, and they're still in the requested filter
[6:37pm] Ironholds: Fluffernutter: ooh, weird. I'll aks the devs.
[6:37pm] Ironholds: interestingly - fabriceflorin, did you see Adam Hyland's AFT4 presentation?
[6:37pm] Fluffernutter: (even after i switched away from that filter and then back to it)
[6:37pm] matthiasmullie: mabdul: no - really? an opera user in the wild? I thought I was their only fan
[6:37pm] Apheori: Ironholds: It's light. http://gardenofremembering.org/projects/unreal/gghjk.png
[6:37pm] Ironholds: he found that we don't actually lose much detail in terms of quantitative data switching from 4 to 5
[6:37pm] Ironholds: matthiasmullie: I believe Apheori uses opera too
[6:37pm] Ironholds: Apheori: gratzi
[6:37pm] matthiasmullie: wow
[6:37pm] Apheori: Yes,
[6:37pm] mabdul: matthiasmullie: nono, there are even more. Actually Opera has ~10% in germany
[6:38pm] Ironholds: matthiasmullie: are we supporting opera at the mo?
[6:38pm] Ironholds: this could explain Apheori's issue
[6:38pm] matthiasmullie: mabdul: on a serious note though; I'm seeing it on opera, 64bit etc, using monobook - do the other AFT-things work for you? (form & special page)
[6:38pm] Apheori: fabriceflorin: Why can't it do both? There are two links on the contributions line, both which go to the same thing currently.
[6:38pm] mabdul: matthiasmullie: the only real browser which is fast and can handle 70+ tabs; and some cool things like gestures and keyboard stuff which isn't doable without extensions in the other browsers. dragonfly is also not bad ;)
[6:39pm] mabdul: matthiasmullie: never tested...
[6:39pm] fabriceflorin: Apheori: To make sure we are on the same page, can you clarify where you see two separate links for a contribution?
[6:39pm] mabdul: matthiasmullie: and I use normally modern (with a custom CSS hiding unneeded stuff like the footer and the print box, etc)
[6:39pm] Risker left the chat room. (Quit: "No one told me it was a bring your own rubber tortoise party.")
[6:39pm] Apheori: fabriceflorin: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/115.248.50.22
[6:40pm] matthiasmullie: Ironholds: we are supporting opera, yes
[6:40pm] Apheori: The top thing.
[6:40pm] Apheori: Two links to the same thing.
[6:40pm] Nathan2055 is now known as Nathan2055|idle.
[6:40pm] mabdul: matthiasmullie: actually nothing works, one moment, I will use my not fully swicthed 32bit opera
[6:40pm] Ironholds: Apheori: oh, with the date stamp?
[6:41pm] Ironholds: good point
[6:41pm] • Ironholds adds to list
[6:41pm] AzaToth joined the chat room.
[6:41pm] fabriceflorin: Apheori: Excellent point. I had forgotten that the date / time stamp also links to the permalink page :p -- perhaps we could leave that link on the timestamp, and use the other method for the second link, taking you to the feedback page with that comment on top. Would that work for you?
[6:41pm] chrismcmahon joined the chat room.
[6:42pm] Apheori: Be nice.
[6:42pm] Mh7kJ joined the chat room.
[6:42pm] mabdul: matthiasmullie: oooh, I see... reloading resolved the issue
[6:42pm] Apheori: Although a link to the article itself would also be nice, but perhaps I'm just being picky and stalkery.
[6:43pm] jps: Adam Hyland's AFT4 presentation shows the bimodalities of 1-4 ratings at http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3AMeasuring_Quality_Content_Wikimania_2012.pdf&page=17 -- that is why they can't be used for so many different kinds of measures. Did you find...yes/no is far better even though it's only a bit
[6:43pm] matthiasmullie: oh ok; glad the issue's gone since I couldn't think of any more possible cause
[6:43pm] jps: s/1-4/1-5/
[6:43pm] AzaToth: As I just got knowledge about that the feedback is accessible from the talk page, I must point out it's rather useless, as there are no indication on the talk page there are any _new_ feedback
[6:43pm] mabdul: Ironholds: the banner is... err ... always popping up. can we hide it somehow... it goes on my nervs
[6:44pm] Ironholds: mabdul: what? it should be turned off once you dismiss it
[6:44pm] Ironholds: are you switching between machines or something?
[6:44pm] AzaToth: probably most feedback will be unnoticed for aeons
[6:44pm] Ironholds: jps: I don' think we've done research on that yet :)
[6:44pm] Ironholds: *don't
[6:45pm] fabriceflorin: Apheori: The second link in the contributions page would take you to this version of the feedback page, with the selected comment highlighted on top, as so: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ArticleFeedbackv5/Golden-crowned_Sparrow&ref=cta#170990
[6:45pm] jps: anytime you have a range response bimodal at the ends you can't know where the mean is
[6:45pm] mabdul: Ironholds: nope: same machine,err i know the problem: secure.wikim; https and http; and actually TWO browser (opera 32 bit, and the new not finished customized 64bit)
[6:45pm] jps: and the mean is kind of important. The percentage of the (e.g. v5) bit is much more robust
[6:45pm] Ironholds: mabdul: that'd be the problem, then, yeah :)
[6:45pm] mabdul: Ironholds: cookies are bad
[6:46pm] Ironholds: mabdul: got a better idea, then? :p
[6:46pm] Fluffernutter: Ironholds: think I tracked down the "when" for when items move from "requested" to another category - on page reload, rather than live or on filter reload
[6:46pm] AzaToth: when visiting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:3000_%28number%29 for example, there are no evidence that there are any new feedback
[6:46pm] Apheori: fabriceflorin: Excellent, although when stalking people sometimes it matters more what they're commenting on than on the comments themselves.
[6:46pm] Ironholds: Fluffernutter: ahh. that a problem?
[6:46pm] Apheori: Wikipedians are, after all, nothing more than a mass of creepy stalkers.
[6:46pm] mabdul: Ironholds: get the WMF to store the banner notices by userprefs
[6:46pm] Apheori: mabdul: YES.
[6:46pm] Fluffernutter: Ironholds: well, it's suboptimal, flow-wise. I'd prefer to have them move live, or to at least not have to refresh the whole page. But at least now that I know the trick I can work with it.
[6:46pm] Apheori: The entire extension needs a rewrite.
[6:46pm] mabdul: Ironholds: there are also users who clear the cookies after closing the browsers...
[6:47pm] mabdul: +1
[6:47pm] mabdul: don't store the feedback in the contribs table ;-)
[6:47pm] AzaToth: also,
[6:47pm] Apheori: Cookie-based makes sense for IPs. It does not make sense for logged-in users.
[6:47pm] AzaToth: as a non-normal person, "Did you find what you were looking for?" makes no sense for me
[6:47pm] AzaToth: ツ
[6:47pm] Fajro: So... the new version looks good.. how much more testing before it is available on all wikis?
[6:48pm] fabriceflorin: jps: Thanks for bringing up Adam Hyland's very illuminating presentation at Wikimania. I spent some time with him afterwards, and he is leaning towards the same conclusion as we did, that ratings are not as effective as quality evaluation tools as the original developers of AFT4 had hoped. However, in its new form with comments, it appears to be a powerful reader engagement tool -- and may also be a lot more useful to editors.
[6:48pm] Apheori: Mmm, a lot of people do read just for curiosity's sake... and could be looking for all sorts of things to boot.
[6:48pm] AzaToth: first question to ask is: "dis you look for something, and did you actually know what you where looking for?"
[6:48pm] Apheori: Like pictures of something related.
[6:48pm] goethe_wiki left the chat room. (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
[6:48pm] • jps nods in agreement
[6:48pm] AzaToth: still though
[6:48pm] Apheori: Well, were they looking for something in scope?
[6:48pm] AzaToth: (if someone is actually reading my feedback...)
[6:48pm] Apheori: People looking at porn articles, after all...
[6:49pm] fabriceflorin: Apheori: So glad this approach works for you. matthiasmullie : I believe it should be very straightforward to change the second link on the Contributions page as proposed above. Am I right?
[6:49pm] AzaToth: _how_ are editors meant to know there are any _new_ feedback available?
[6:49pm] matthiasmullie: fabriceflorin: you are correc
[6:49pm] matthiasmullie: t
[6:50pm] Ironholds: AzaToth: that's a good point
[6:50pm] jps: also as a practical matter there are many ways to misinterpret or read too much in to range responses that you just can't do with a bit
[6:50pm] Apheori: Maybe it should show up on their watchlists if they have the article watched...
[6:50pm] Apheori: Or maybe not. That could get messy.
[6:50pm] Ironholds: we're talking about having a watchlist notice that links you to a feed of feedback from your articles
[6:50pm] Krinkle left the chat room. (Quit: Krinkle)
[6:50pm] Ironholds: the idea of watchlisting individual article AFT5 pages is a more long-term but difficult solution
[6:50pm] Ironholds: obviously it's non-optimal to have it tied into every page on your watchlist
[6:50pm] James_F_ joined the chat room.
[6:50pm] Ironholds: you'd never sleep :P
[6:50pm] Apheori: That's yet another thing to click on, though... centralising everything can be very helpful.
[6:51pm] Nathan2055|idle: A quick potentially off-topic question: Why do we have the AFT?
[6:51pm] AzaToth: Ironholds: "You have 7,732 pages on your watchlist (excluding talk pages). "
[6:51pm] Nathan2055|idle: I mean, we already have talk pages...
[6:51pm] AzaToth: dont add an extra watchlist entry please ツ
[6:51pm] Apheori: Nathan2055|idle: Because talkpages are confusing.
[6:51pm] Fluffernutter: greetings, James_F
[6:51pm] Apheori: And people dunno what to do with them.
[6:51pm] Apheori: And other things.
[6:51pm] Nathan2055|idle: I think AFT is a tad more confusing.
[6:52pm] fabriceflorin: Apheori: Several people have asked for a watch list feature, and we are aiming to provide a simple solution, if we can squeeze it in this release. See our conversation here on the AFT5 talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Article_Feedback_Tool/Version_5#Can.27t_add_pages_to_watchlist
[6:52pm] AzaToth: I think there should be a personalized notice on the page AND talk page of the article informing about new feedbacks
[6:52pm] mabdul: AzaToth: heh, I cleaned my up last month: 4k before, now a bit under 2k
[6:52pm] Nathan2055|idle: It offers a better interface yes, but listening to you guys discuss methods of hacking and manipulating code so that you can implement it is boring, and besides, this appears to have damaged more than it has helped...
[6:52pm] fabriceflorin: Speaking of which, you are all very welcome to add more of your fine suggestions on that talk page, if you come up with any ideas after this chat ;o)
[6:53pm] Apheori: How will cross-wiki watchlist-type thingies work? Can this be done the same way, or is that project too different?
[6:53pm] mabdul: moster created users through ACC and deleted pages...
[6:53pm] Ironholds: AzaToth: indeed :)
[6:53pm] AzaToth: mabdul: "You got 1425 new feedback to _your_ articles"
[6:53pm] Ironholds: what I meant was - say that message
[6:53pm] mabdul: [20:52:21] <Apheori> Nathan2055|idle: Because talkpages are confusing. - I have a soultion: liquid threads...
[6:53pm] Nathan2055|idle: No.
[6:53pm] Nathan2055|idle: No/
[6:54pm] Nathan2055|idle: And no, that's more confusing than vanilla talk pages!
[6:54pm] Ironholds: after it it would say "some of these pages may have feedback"
[6:54pm] fabriceflorin: AzaToth: Thanks for your good suggestions. So glad to have the creator of Twinkle on this chat, what an honor ;o)
[6:54pm] Ironholds: and that link would take you to a single page that shows, in order of posting time, the feedback for all your articles
[6:54pm] • AzaToth hides
[6:54pm] Apheori: BAHAHAHAH liquidthreads...
[6:54pm] James_F left the chat room. (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
[6:54pm] James_F_ is now known as James_F.
[6:54pm] Nathan2055|idle: "and besides, this appears to have damaged more than it has helped..." - Didn't the site-wide implementation cause this replag?
[6:54pm] Ironholds: AzaToth: fabriceflorin isn't taking the piss, he's genuinely that friendly ;p
[6:55pm] AzaToth: liquid threads? like the one they use on mediawiki.org?
[6:55pm] Ironholds: I know, as a wikipedian, niceness freaked me out at firs ttoo
[6:55pm] Nathan2055|idle: AzaToth: Yes.
[6:55pm] Ironholds: ;p
[6:55pm] mabdul: AzaToth: yeah, i don't like them... ^^
[6:55pm] J-Away left the chat room. (Remote host closed the connection)
[6:55pm] Ironholds: Nathan2055|idle: how has it damaged more than it has helped?
[6:55pm] fabriceflorin: Sorry if I am being too effusive. I'll try to be more reserved in the future, but I really like hanging out with you guys ;o)
[6:55pm] Ironholds: and no, the replag isn't related to AFT5, to our knowledge
[6:55pm] AzaToth: Nathan2055|idle: I always wondered why it says "my new messages (48)" while there are no new messages to me, onle random people talking about stuff
[6:55pm] Apheori: What I like is how the sorts of things like liquidthreads and message wall are good ideas in theory and yet they suck so much in practice...
[6:56pm] Apheori: But anyhoo.
[6:56pm] J-Away joined the chat room.
[6:56pm] Nathan2055|idle: Ironholds: [14:54]Nathan2055|idle"and besides, this appears to have damaged more than it has helped..." - Didn't the site-wide implementation cause this replag?
[6:56pm] mabdul: Ironholds: users have less time to build the encyclopedia ;-)
[6:56pm] wing2 joined the chat room.
[6:56pm] Ironholds: Apheori: liquidthreads is dead and done, don't worry about it :)
[6:56pm] • Apheori hugs fabriceflorin.
[6:56pm] Nathan2055|idle: And it discourages users from editing.
[6:56pm] Ironholds: Nathan2055|idle: if we're talking AFT5 - again, what replag?
[6:56pm] Ironholds: and no, it doesn't
[6:56pm] fabriceflorin: We spend all our days toiling on small trivial details, so it's always a pleasure to come meet you and discuss that work with actual users ;o)
[6:56pm] Ironholds: we actively researched this possibility - that we might be giving people a way to submit help that wasn't edit and so they wouldn't edit
[6:57pm] Ironholds: the research says that it either makes no difference, or the difference it does make is outstripped by an *increase* in people editing
[6:57pm] Ironholds: I'm happy to link you to the data if you want to read through it :)
[6:57pm] Apheori: That is what the invitation for them to edit is for, no?
[6:57pm] Apheori: This thing does include an invitation, right?
[6:57pm] Apheori: Or was that something else?
[6:57pm] Ironholds: Apheori: it does, yep :)
[6:57pm] Nathan2055|idle: AFT4 did.
[6:57pm] AzaToth: Ironholds: the question though doesn't imply any feedback to the article in question
[6:57pm] Nathan2055|idle: I don't believe AFT5 does.
[6:58pm] fabriceflorin: Here's a link to the research which Ironholds just cited. It was very revealing to us: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Article_feedback/Stage_3/Conversion_and_newcomer_quality
[6:58pm] AzaToth: "Did you find what you were looking for?"...
[6:58pm] Nathan2055|idle: I'm not trying to flame, I'm just showing it from a different perspective.
[6:58pm] Apheori: What were you looking for?
[6:58pm] Ironholds: Nathan2055|idle: sure :). But we've actively disproved this perspective ;p
[6:58pm] Ironholds: yes, AFT5 does include a call to edit
[6:58pm] DarTar left the chat room. (Quit: DarTar)
[6:58pm] Ironholds: yes, we have researched cannibalisation and it isn't happening
[6:58pm] Ironholds: no, AFT5 is not causing a replag.
[6:58pm] AzaToth: better to ask an question like "Do you feel enlightened now?"
[6:59pm] fabriceflorin: Apheori: The idea of using the question "What were you looking for?" was suggested by a W
[6:59pm] Ironholds: and I know our devs are working very hard to make sure it doesn't cause wider ops issues when we deploy further
[6:59pm] Apheori: A W?
[6:59pm] Ironholds: Apheori: Wikipedian, I assume
[6:59pm] Ironholds: I think he hit enter accidentally :)
[6:59pm] Nathan2055|idle: Ironholds: Uh, I don't believe that's true...
[6:59pm] Apheori: Well, to be fair, no question could cover all potential uses.
[7:00pm] Nathan2055|idle: Wasn't the lag at least heightened slightly by this update
[7:00pm] fabriceflorin: (Take 2) Apheori: The idea of using the question "Did you find what you were looking for?" was suggested by a Wikipedian, and we tested it extensively against other types of feedback form. It seemed the most practical and least judgmental way for us to measure the user's overall satisfaction with the page.
[7:00pm] Apheori: Cool.
[7:00pm] AzaToth: in what context is "Did you find what you were looking for?" meant to be evaluated in?
[7:01pm] fabriceflorin: Apheori: Yes, we couldn't find a better generic question that supported our objectives as effectively.
[7:01pm] AzaToth: my first instinct is that the question is "did you find the right article?"
[7:01pm] Ironholds: Nathan2055|idle: don't believe what is true? There isn't, to my knowledge, a lag at the moment. Which lag are you referring to?
[7:01pm] Nathan2055|idle: It reminds me of the kinds of forms found at the bottom of proprietary documentation.
[7:01pm] Ironholds: I will defer to matthiasmullie, fabriceflorin on the issue though; they're more technical than me
[7:01pm] AzaToth: but I assume it's meaning is "did you find and understood the information you where lookin for in this particular article, and no one else?"
[7:01pm] Nathan2055|idle: [15:01]EarwigBotNathan2055|idle: enwiki: Toolserver replag is 12 hours, 21 minutes, 17 seconds; database maxlag is 0 seconds.
[7:02pm] Apheori: That said, it ain't a perfect question. I'm not saying there's necessarily anything better, but too much oughtn't be read into it by those putting the feedback itself to use - sorting by the yes or no, for instance, would be very limited in use as a result.
[7:02pm] Ironholds: Nathan2055|idle: Toolserver. Toolserver replag.
[7:02pm] StevenW left the chat room. (Quit: ["Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com"])
[7:02pm] James_F left the chat room. (Quit: James_F)
[7:02pm] Nathan2055|idle: That lag, the one that has put AFC 12 hours behind.
[7:02pm] Ironholds: our software is not running on or near the toolserver.
[7:02pm] Apheori: Do the people reading the feedback recognise this?
[7:02pm] fabriceflorin: AzaToth: Here is a link to some of the research we conducted on different experiments, as an FYI. There are more studies linked to that hub . http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Article_feedback/Volume
[7:02pm] Ironholds: our software is running on the core cluster
[7:02pm] Nathan2055|idle: That's not what I was told...
[7:02pm] Ironholds: Nathan2055|idle: you were told wrong then :). It's all core-hosted
[7:02pm] Ironholds: we did host a couple of testing tools on the TS
[7:02pm] Ironholds: but that was about 5 months ago
[7:02pm] Nathan2055|idle is now known as Nathan2055|away.
[7:02pm] Ironholds: (anyway, must dash to the loo - back in five)
[7:02pm] Nathan2055|away: Be back in ten here.
[7:03pm] fabriceflorin: Also, this slide-show provides a quick overview of key findings from our various research studies, along with general info about AFT5: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Article-Feedback-Slides-07-13-2012.pdf&page=1
[7:04pm] fabriceflorin: Speaking of slide shows, any comments about the Video Tour we created for this feature? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Article_Feedback_Tool/Version_5/Video -- We are thinking of using the same format for another tool we are developing, code-named Page Triage, and would love suggestions for improvement about this format.
[7:05pm] jps left the chat room. (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
[7:05pm] Fajro left the chat room. (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
[7:05pm] AzaToth: fabriceflorin: lots of nice graphs and academia
[7:05pm] vbamba joined the chat room.
[7:05pm] Apheori: AFT5 feedback pages don't fit in my browser.
[7:05pm] AzaToth: fabriceflorin: but I can't find any indications they know what "find" refers to
[7:05pm] Apheori: I'm disappointed.
[7:05pm] matthiasmullie: Nathan2055|away: when was that issue? first I've heard of it
[7:05pm] Krinkle joined the chat room.
[7:05pm] MartijnH: fabriceflorin, why are the editors dressed differently than the readers?
[7:06pm] Apheori: Some of us do still use 1024x768 monitors, you know.
[7:06pm] Excirial: matthiasmullie - the replag issue?
[7:06pm] Ironholds: back!
[7:06pm] AzaToth: MartijnH: the second slide could be declared as sexistic
[7:06pm] Ironholds: alright, I think it's the end of the session, I'm afraid :)
[7:07pm] matthiasmullie: Excirial: yes
[7:07pm] Ironholds: if any of you have any additional questions, please do email me (okeyes@wikimedia.org) or drop a note on my talkpage on enwiki User talk:Okeyes (WMF)