Research talk:Expanding Wikipedia articles across languages/Inter language approach/Feedback

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

Please create a new section on this talkpage to provide more detailed feedback on the section recommendations for individual articles. You can use this template to track the individual article, language and recommended sections.

Feedback on specific articles[edit]

Please post your feedback on specific recommendations here. Copy/paste the recommendation feedback template from the web tool here so that we can interpret your feedback.

Letterlocking@enwiki[edit]

Letterlocking
language en
link https://secrec.wmflabs.org/?lang=en&title=Letterlocking
recommendation 1
recommendation 2
recommendation 3
recommendation 4
recommendation 5
I just tired this on a new stub I made to see what would happen, but I got a null recommendation - is this dependent on the article existing in other languages? — xaosflux Talk 20:12, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Diego: If the article don't exists in other 5 languages (currently we cover en,ar,fr,es,pt and ja), you are likely to not get recommendations. That's why this approach would work better for under resourced languages. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Diego (WMF) (talk) 15:54, 22 March 2019‎

Kanto Pro Championship@enwiki[edit]

Kanto Pro Championship
language en
link https://secrec.wmflabs.org/?lang=en&title=Kanto Pro Championship
recommendation 1 References
recommendation 2
recommendation 3
recommendation 4
recommendation 5
I don't know how useful a recommendation like this would be. Would it be a good idea to filter out extremely common suggestions like "References", "See also", and "Notes"? Rchard2scout (talk) 21:35, 21 March 2019 (UTC)


Diego: We have checked that, but there is not a clear cut for the most popular sections. We could remove the top-N sections, but the N value it's not clear, moreover changes depending on the language. And, more important, especially for newbies, if an article is missing a very obvious section, it would be important to be aware that section is missing. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Diego (WMF) (talk) 15:54, 22 March 2019‎

General feedback or questions[edit]

If you have questions about the project, or feedback on the design of the rating tool, please add that here.

Removing non-applicable questions[edit]

The question "Are redundant or conflict with the existing sections in the article" is not applicable if there are currently no sections in the article. Similarly, the question "Are redundant or conflict with other recommended sections" is not applicable if there's only one recommended section. Would it be possible and/or useful to remove those questions? Rchard2scout (talk) 21:37, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
I understand your point, however, giving the this will require some tweaks on the app, I would suggest just to leave empty or mark as Disagree. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Diego (WMF) (talk) 15:54, 22 March 2019‎

Unimpressed[edit]

en:Joe Garagiola Sr.--> Recommends Career, Awards, Playing career, Bibliography. Horribly wrong for all of them. When there's already a section of Baseball career why are the two sections about career recommended? Awards duplicates honor. Please remove sections like Bibliography from being ever recommended. Winged Blades of Godric (talk) 11:47, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Please allow us to review the recommendations on a per-section basis. Also, where's the code for this tool? Winged Blades of Godric (talk) 11:47, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
Here is the code for the tool: Diego (WMF) (talk) 16:17, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

key additional question[edit]

Is the material for this section already present within another section of the article, or is the material not present in the article at all? Examples might be a "Life and Work" section, which in most cases I would separate into a section "Biography" and a section "Professional Career" , or a needed section "List of Works" where the titles of the works might either be present in a more general section, or not given at all. In practice, most of the organizational changes I make in revising an article are like this. DGG (talk) 23:33, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

That's good point, and I can see two cases here: partial overlap of sections, and the other is about hierarchy, sections that might be subsections of other. Learning hierarchies across sections, it's complex, but we should research on that direction. Diego (WMF) (talk) 11:58, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Layout of rating tool if a thumbnail is included[edit]

Hi, I suggest changing the layout of the first 2 segments on the rating tool page, to fix the problem with the "Current sections ..." bulletpoints that sometimes wrap around (and partially overlap with) the image in a confusing way. Cf screenshot. Perhaps either (A) add something to <clear> the floated content before the "Current sections ..." header, or (B) move the image to the right of the text (in LTR languages). Cheers. Quiddity (talk) 20:02, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, we will consider this for future versions of this tool. Diego (WMF) (talk) 11:58, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Lack of parallelism in redundancy questions[edit]

Right now, I press "agree" for the first two questions if the recommendations are good. But for the third and fourth questions, about redundancy, I press "agree" is there is a problem. That's somewhat confusing, and while I know convention wisdom is to avoid using "not" in questions, I think this is a case where it would be an improvement. MarginalCost (talk) 03:32, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Got your point, and we will take this in account for future versions of this tool. Diego (WMF) (talk) 11:58, 4 April 2019 (UTC)