2010/6/2 Aryeh Gregor :
> On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>> Who cares if people click them a lot? The space they formally
>> occupied is filled with nothing now.
>
> Interface clutter is not psychologically free. Empty space is better
> than space filled with mostly-usele
Michael Snow wrote:
>
> Similarly, we know that the community population skews young and male.
> That has important consequences, and some of those unfortunately
> reinforce our lack of diversity. It's been pointed out what a
> male-centric approach we sometimes have, in the enthusiasm and manne
On 6/6/2010 2:57 PM, Mariano Cecowski wrote:
> I can't believe that with all the complains no one has yet brought up the
> fact that the 'watch' has been replaced by a star that turns blue instead of
> yellow.
>
> I always think I don't have the page in my watchlist!!!
>
> Now, that's a reason to
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 6:23 AM, Roan Kattouw wrote:
> Chad writes:
>> I'd like to touch on this one particular point. The community HAS spoken
>> and clearly wants it back the way it was. A volunteer even did so [0] but
>> was reverted [1] with the message that UI changes to Vector are off-limits
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 5:40 PM, Victor Vasiliev wrote:
>
> Oh, and no wonder that IW links are used less in Vector than in
> Monobook. Monobook sidebar has clear division between blocks. Vector
> has some loosy line between them. Also, in Vector sidebar elements are
> on the grey background, so mo
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 12:22 PM, MZMcBride wrote:
>
> (...)
> The default should be flipped. There is near-universal agreement on this
> point at this point, including from Erik Moeller. I expect this will happen
> on Monday.
>
> And, for those curious, the article with 243 interlanguage links is
MZMcBride wrote:
> MZMcBride wrote:
>
>> As far as I'm aware, nobody has properly graphed interlanguage link
>> occurrence on the English Wikipedia. The data I found querying non-redirects
>> in the article namespace on the English Wikipedia is available here.[1] As
>> you can see, 1774000 artic
I can't believe that with all the complains no one has yet brought up the fact
that the 'watch' has been replaced by a star that turns blue instead of yellow.
I always think I don't have the page in my watchlist!!!
Now, that's a reason to complain (Lynch the usability team!)
MarianoC.-
--- El
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 2:51 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
wrote:
>
> I would suggest that instead of a wall between the community
> and the foundation, there should be built a bridge. A form
> of consultation by a small group of "wise heads" from the
> communities, who know how they work; not as a deci
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 3:24 PM, phoebe ayers wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
> wrote:
> > Keegan Peterzell wrote:
> >> Okay, so from my perspective, here's where we are:
> >>
> >> The WMF staff cares about the projects and we respect the work that they
> do [snip]
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 1:07 AM, Erik Moeller wrote:
> The original intent of the UX team, as I understand it, was to help
> readers find essential (frequently clicked) elements in the navigation
> more easily by collapsing less essential ones.
This is wrong approach of reworking sidebar. To do it
MZMcBride wrote:
> As far as I'm aware, nobody has properly graphed interlanguage link
> occurrence on the English Wikipedia. The data I found querying non-redirects
> in the article namespace on the English Wikipedia is available here.[1] As
> you can see, 1774000 articles have 0 interlanguage lin
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
wrote:
> Keegan Peterzell wrote:
>> Okay, so from my perspective, here's where we are:
>>
>> The WMF staff cares about the projects and we respect the work that they do
>> [snip] but this is what a thread
>> like the ones we've had recently f
Chad writes:
> I'd like to touch on this one particular point. The community HAS spoken
> and clearly wants it back the way it was. A volunteer even did so [0] but
> was reverted [1] with the message that UI changes to Vector are off-limits
> without some sort of prior discussion and approval.
>
Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> [...]
> Data is important. It's also not always possible to gather. When
> multiple things are competing for attention, you can make one or the
> other more prominent, and it will get correspondingly more clicks.
> But it's up to your judgment to assess whether that's a go
Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> I should say that *almost no* users complain about small things. A
> tiny group of committed users will complain about small things, but
> they're not the targets of the Usability Initiative, so their
> complaints are not relevant here, *except* insofar as they provide
> rea
Regarding clutter and ease of finding the right language I believe it helps
a lot if the user realizes that the languages are listed in their native
form and are mostly in alphabetic order.
What often causes difficulty for me is the fact that the languages are often
in some strange order (e.g. orde
Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> My first guess would be that people didn't complain about interwiki
links'
> clutter because they've always been there. By the time you're
comfortable
> enough with the site to complain, you just won't notice
them. I'd guess that
> the complaints you see are when things *cha
One thing that is undoubtedly good is that users now have the choice of
displaying lists like the interwiki links, or not. The system seems to do a
reasonable job remembering a user's preferences. Someone who prefers the
interwiki links hidden can get them off his screen with a click.
But the
Sorry, I was using an idiom for good idea, let's get started :)
On Jun 6, 2010 10:26 AM, "Jussi-Ville Heiskanen"
wrote:
Keegan Peterzell wrote: > On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 2:51 AM, Jussi-Ville
Heiskanen > > I am sorry, I just can't parse what you are suggesting here. >> This
doesn't correspond to a
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 11:14 AM, Mark Williamson wrote:
>> "change it back if people complain loudly". It means someone who
>> happens to be in charge of making the decision needs to make a
>> judgment call, based on all the evidence they have available.
>
> Aryeh, I was under the (apparently mis
James Heilman wrote:
> I think most of us contribute as we feel that this is our encyclopedia.
> This is especially true for those not being paid but I am sure it also
> applies to those on staff as well. An us versus them mentality does not add
> anything. We are all here for one main purpose "
> "change it back if people complain loudly". It means someone who
> happens to be in charge of making the decision needs to make a
> judgment call, based on all the evidence they have available.
Aryeh, I was under the (apparently mistaken?) impression that at
Wikipedia, the community makes the d
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 4:21 PM, David Levy wrote:
> At the English Wikipedia, this is not so. If we had a bike shed,
> there would be daily complaints about its color.
I should say that *almost no* users complain about small things. A
tiny group of committed users will complain about small thin
2010/6/6 Aryeh Gregor :
> On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>> There is a clear attitude from the foundation staff that I, and
>> others, are perceiving in these discussions. The notion that the
>> community of contributors is a particularly whiny batch of customers
>> who mu
Keegan Peterzell wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 2:51 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
> wrote:
>
>
>> I am sorry, I just can't parse what you are suggesting here.
>> This doesn't correspond to anything real in the past
>> or anything hypothetically in our future.
>>
>> There has never been a "Get off
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> There is a clear attitude from the foundation staff that I, and
> others, are perceiving in these discussions. The notion that the
> community of contributors is a particularly whiny batch of customers
> who must be 'managed', that they exp
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 2:51 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
wrote:
>
> I would suggest that instead of a wall between the community
> and the foundation, there should be built a bridge. A form
> of consultation by a small group of "wise heads" from the
> communities, who know how they work; not as a deci
I think most of us contribute as we feel that this is our encyclopedia.
This is especially true for those not being paid but I am sure it also
applies to those on staff as well. An us versus them mentality does not add
anything. We are all here for one main purpose " to write the best
encyclopedi
Keegan Peterzell wrote:
> Okay, so from my perspective, here's where we are:
>
> The WMF staff cares about the projects and we respect the work that they do.
> Additionally, they do a much better job than the other top...well, one
> hundred websites in the world in communicating with their volunte
Nathan wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 5:43 AM, Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
>> It seems then that there is a question of jurisdiction involved. It has
>> been my long held understanding that the Wikimedia projects have
>> operated under the laws of the United States, and that WMF has been
>> consist
31 matches
Mail list logo
