If you want to continue the conversation around Edit Check's next steps, the Editing team will host a conversation on Wednesday 3 July 2024, 17:30 UTC <https://zonestamp.toolforge.org/1720027800>. The subject is "Expanding Edit Check".
This meeting will be hosted on Zoom <https://wikimedia.zoom.us/j/87955642314>, in English. You can signup on mediawiki.org <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Editing_team/Community_Conversations#Next_Conversation> . The two main topics will be: - CopyVio Check <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T359107>: learn what volunteers think of the proposed user experience for the initial version of the CopyVio Check - Real-time Checks <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Edit_check#5_June_2024>: learn what volunteers think about a version of Edit Check that would show people feedback, in real-time. See you there! -- Benoît Evellin - Trizek (he/him) Movement Communications Specialist (Product & Tech) Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/> On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 12:05 AM Peter Pelberg <[email protected]> wrote: > Steven + Sj + Petr: you can expect responses from Megan to the question > y'all posed about the quantitative findings before this week is over. > > Before that a few things: > > 1. Sj: you shared some reflections about the current state of the > mobile editing experience and offered an idea for a metric we might > consider using to evaluate Edit Check's broader impact on, let's call it, > "edit session health." > 2. Todd + Steven: you both touched on an important topic that I'm > understanding (perhaps inaccurately!) as something to the effect of: *How > does Edit Check cope with the fact that not all new content additions > require a source?* > 3. Clover Moss: no worries! Thank you for naming > the relationship between this thread and Edit check > <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Edit_check>. > 4. Sj: you also shared some feedback about the technical prototype for > offering people Edit checks *while* they're typing > > <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/File:EditCheck_mid_edit_suggestions_idea_sketch_2024-05.webm>. > I'm going to follow up in more detail on mw:Talk:Edit_check > > <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Edit_check#Edit_Checks_as_you_are_typing> > . > 1. And for people here: please, if you have a moment to review the > demo > > <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/File:EditCheck_mid_edit_suggestions_idea_sketch_2024-05.webm>, > the Editing Team needs your help! Specifically with identifying > assumptions > the demo makes that defy what you've come to know/think... > > Now, detailed responses to points "1." and "2." below... > > *== Current state of mobile editing == * > > *> ~ The mobile editing experience still feels a bit tenuous for me even > without this, and each additional modal or dialogue makes it a bit harder. > Perhaps a new paradigm could help? Letting people break mobile edits up > into steps, each saved in a sub-revision? * > Sj, by "tenuous," might you be referring to the amount of context, > patience/time/focus, effort, and trial and error the current > default/full-page editing experience requires of people, across experience > levels, to contribute constructively? > > If so, I think we might be aligned on perceiving these experiences in this > way… > > In fact, a focus of the 2024-2025 annual plan > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2024-2025/Product_%26_Technology_OKRs#Draft_Key_Results> > (see > "WE1.2") will be introducing, "...smaller, structured, and more > task-specific editing workflows" in service of addressing the "tenuousness" > you're drawing our collective attention to. > > Now, what we mean when we say "...smaller, structured, and more > task-specific editing workflows" could benefit from some more discussion. > To that end, I've added this area as a discussion topic > <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Topic:Y6vq68wgure4idsi> for a future Editing > Team Community Conversation > <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Editing_team/Community_Conversations> > . > > How about: if you are interested in reflecting on, and sharing ideas > about, the default/full-page mobile editing experiences, please follow > Sj's lead > <https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Topic:Y6vq68wgure4idsi&action=compare-post-revisions&topic_newRevision=y6wdvdpuuws1h58l> > and indicate as much by commenting here > <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Topic:Y6vq68wgure4idsi>? > > *== Visual editor session "health" ==* > *> I also appreciate that you're tracking how often editors come back in > future months. One other aspect it would be nice to see: how much time > editors take before saving an Edit-Checked edit.* > > Mmm, +1. Time-to-save could be useful in helping to build a picture of how > "healthy" and effective the Edit Check-enabled editing experience is. > > If other ideas come to mind for how we might evaluate overall edit session > health (there may be a better term for this), now is an ideal time to voice > them. > > Reason being: the Editing Team is actively defining the requirements for > a dashboard <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T367130> for this purpose. > > In the meantime, Sj, I've added the idea you shared to the ticket where > this work is happening: T367130 > <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T367130>. > > *== No firm rules ==* > *> Not all changes require a source. * > > Steven, we seem to be aligned in understanding Wikipedia:Verifiability > <https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q79951> as including cases where new > content does not need a source. To this end, Edit Check does not suggest > otherwise. > > In fact, more broadly, "No Firm Rules" is a design principle > <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Editing_team/Community_Conversations#Outcome_of_past_meetings,_January_2023> > that has, and continues to guide the Edit Check project. > > We are attempting to embody this pillar in the context of Reference Check > by making it so the experience invites you to explicitly decide > <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Edit_Check_(References,_mobile).png> > whether you think a source is needed or not and does not make publishing > the edit you're making contingent upon how you respond. > > As always, please let us know if anything here brings new > questions/ideas/concerns to mind...this work benefits from opportunities to > expose the thinking it rests upon and improve it as a result. > > -- > Peter Pelberg (he/him) > Lead Product Manager, Editing Team > Wikimedia Foundation > > > On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 8:20 AM <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 6:12 PM Samuel Klein <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> ~ The report says "*On mobile, edit completion rate decreased by -24.3% >>> (-13.5pp)*" -- what's the difference between the first and (second) >>> percentage figures? >>> >> >> I don’t know but I’d guess that the previous edit completion rate was >> 55.5%; with the Edit Check, the completion rate fell by 13.5pp to 40%, >> which is a decrease of 24.3% (13.5/55.5). >> >> -- [[ cs:User:Mormegil | Petr Kadlec ]] >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines >> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l >> Public archives at >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/63SD6O2OOB72J4PH3CYPCOPHMXCBTJWU/ >> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines > at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > Public archives at > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/NS7G7ZBWMGA2BY2UHRFN5QHZCBV4KYKS/ > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/NHPLQWRSB2LKVQENWQQSRMTJ7P6FKPLZ/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
