[Foundation-l] Article Feedback Tool 5 testing deployment

Sat Dec 24 18:09:57 UTC 2011

The option to self-identify as an expert is more to try and gauge where AFT
respondents are coming from, as opposed to excluding non-experts. Average
joes are asked to provide comment, and then asked to identify if they are,
for whatever reason, *not* average joes.

On 24 December 2011 16:43, MZMcBride <z at mzmcbride.com> wrote:

> Oliver Keyes wrote:
> > To reply to Jussi; I think we're uniformly confused as to what you think
> is
> > the link between an encyclopedia written by experts, and an encyclopedia
> > that asks average joes to provide comments on articles (other than the
> > "encyclopedia" bit, of course :-)). If you want this thread to go
> anywhere
> > productively on that issue, you should probably start by explaining what
> > you see as the link.
>
> Past versions of this extension have included a call for people to
> self-identify as experts (or as "highly knowledgeable") in an article's
> topic.[1]
>
> It seems like version 5 no longer includes this checkbox,[2] but I think
> it's slightly unreasonable to suggest that only "average Joes" are being
> asked to provide comments on articles.
>
> I read Cimon's concerns as this tool (and future iterations) moving closer
> to the idea of expert-approved or expert-endorsed revisions (implicitly or
> explicitly). It's an interesting dichotomy between the extension's stated
> goal of trying to attract new users and the extension's past (and present?)
> interface that encourages self-identified expert commentary, isn't it?
>
> MZMcBride
>
> [1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Article_feedback#Version_3
> [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Article_feedback/Version_5
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

-- 
Oliver Keyes
Community Liaison, Product Development
Wikimedia Foundation