Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-27 Thread Jane Darnell
I have tried and failed to use the Visual Editor several times in the past few weeks, and as with all new technologies, I consider myself a follower rather than a leader, so I was very interested to look up the Dutch feedback that Romaine was reporting. One of the comments was that it was

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-27 Thread phoebe ayers
Right -- and if not that specifically, I'd imagine most experienced users do have various hacks, scripts, gadgets etc installed that we've accumulated over the years. I know many people who have been editing for a long time have a custom skin as well. I don't know how any of these might or might

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-27 Thread Erik Moeller
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 12:45 AM, Jane Darnell jane...@gmail.com wrote: I am happy to report that I just discovered what the problem is. I had turned off the Show edit toolbar option in my preferences (probably over a year ago), so I wasn't seeing the top part of the VE edit toolbar, which

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-27 Thread Jane Darnell
I am using chrome and a pretty old computer. I am having trouble getting my editting toolbar to go away again - probably cache problems. I will try to reproduce this properly tomorrow, and otherwise, scratch it up to RTFM 2013/7/27, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org: On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 12:45

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-26 Thread Erik Moeller
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 7:12 PM, Everton Zanella Alvarenga everton.alvare...@okfn.org wrote: Speaking of template madness, the current horrible brokenness that are templates seem to be on the long term roadmap to be fixed. Fixing them requires breaking a whole lot, far more than a visual

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-26 Thread David Gerard
On 26 July 2013 03:12, Everton Zanella Alvarenga everton.alvare...@okfn.org wrote: Maybe a new community (less conservative?) to build a good encyclopedia can come up if a new platformn be invented? Hence power users as a snarl word. After the uprising of the 17th of June The Secretary of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-25 Thread Martijn Hoekstra
On Jul 24, 2013 9:57 AM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org wrote: Should that even be a concern? I mean, if lots of newbies and technophobes start using the Visual Editor and a bunch of us dorks who love writing markup

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-25 Thread Everton Zanella Alvarenga
2013/7/25 Martijn Hoekstra martijnhoeks...@gmail.com: Speaking of template madness, the current horrible brokenness that are templates seem to be on the long term roadmap to be fixed. Fixing them requires breaking a whole lot, far more than a visual editor preference. Is two way community

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-25 Thread Robert Rohde
If I understand the minutes of the VE / Parsoid quarterly review [1] correctly, then significant changes for templates could be on the table for the first half of calendar year 2014. One of the largest technical challenges for the handling of templates in the VE / Parsoid context is that

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-24 Thread Romaine Wiki
I don't get it... What is the purpose of a temporary opt-out? I don't see what that would solve. Power users still don't have a reason to use the VE, performance is worse, handy tools are missing and a lot of things can't be done easily with VE. As others have explained better than I, we

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-24 Thread Lodewijk
Hi Romaine, I'm a little confused as to what exactly you were asking for. Originally, I understood that your point was primarily that the project was being damaged (to the opinion of nlwiki community) because when *new users* are using the Visual Editor, that has negative side effects which need

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-24 Thread Erik Moeller
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org wrote: Should that even be a concern? I mean, if lots of newbies and technophobes start using the Visual Editor and a bunch of us dorks who love writing markup don't, would that matter? That's a great question, Tom. :) We're

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread Erik Moeller
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 9:42 PM, Romaine Wiki romaine_w...@yahoo.com wrote: I still don't see a reflection in your mail that you take the feedback from local communities seriously. Romaine, we're not ignoring feedback. I'm asking James to weigh in with some details relative to the issues

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread James Salsman
Erik Möller wrote: ... we need to collectively figure out what a discoverable, intuitive user experience should look like We're not going to solve these challenges if we lock away VisualEditor... Erik, I don't understand. Could you please explain how making the visual editor opt-in only

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread Erik Moeller
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 10:06 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: This particular ongoing saga (refusing to provide an opt-out mechanism for VisualEditor) seems to largely echo past issues with treating Wikimedia editors as customers instead of colleagues. That's not the intent, and I'm

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread Todd Allen
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 1:01 AM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 10:06 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: This particular ongoing saga (refusing to provide an opt-out mechanism for VisualEditor) seems to largely echo past issues with treating Wikimedia

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread Romaine Wiki
You say you are not ignoring feedback. Then how did it happen that all the feedback we have been given on nl-wiki in the past month is still nothing done with, including some major bugs? Nothing is done with it, you can say you do not ignore feedback, but we would like to see the proof for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread Romaine Wiki
In the most early stages WMF has told us via various way that the visual editor would have an opt-out. It appears that at the last moment before the the launch on the English Wikipedia this was removed. A lot of people are annoyed for years that developers of various software inside and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread Nathan
We need to keep in mind that the people who are vocal on mailing lists, or who participate in on-wiki polls with 50 or 100 participants, represent only a tiny fraction of all Wikimedia users - even only a small fraction of those who are active and registered. Yet the constituency of the WMF must

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread Craig Franklin
Hi Erik, On 23 July 2013 17:01, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: But as I've noted in [1], I do not think a compromise on the preference question is necessarily out of reach. I've asked James and team to deliberate on some of the possibilities here, and offered the same suggestion I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread Erik Moeller
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 6:16 AM, Craig Franklin cfrank...@halonetwork.net wrote: I just want to basically endorse some of the other comments being made here, which I think are quite insightful. If the goal of this project was to get the Visual Editor deployed on time and on budget, then the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread Amir E. Aharoni
2013/7/23 Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org: Should that even be a concern? I mean, if lots of newbies and technophobes start using the Visual Editor and a bunch of us dorks who love writing markup don't, would that matter? I saw the following more than once on editing workshops and similar

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread James Forrester
On 23 July 2013 00:01, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: As I've noted in my response to wikitech-l just now, there's also the issue of what opt-out should mean as VE becomes increasingly more pervasive in the user experience. But as I've noted in [1], I do not think a compromise on the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread MZMcBride
James Forrester wrote: Because I understand the level of concern that this matter is causing, I am changing my mind on this. For the duration of VisualEditor's beta period, there will be an opt-out user preference. This will be deployed tomorrow morning, San Francisco time. Thank you very much

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread David Cuenca
Thanks, James, for the flexibility that you are showing here. I think the Visual Editor is already great and it will become even better after polishing it.I am committed to test it as much as I can and to send some proposals. That haters can disable it completely will leave more room for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-22 Thread Romaine Wiki
Hello Samuel, At any time I am willing to give feedback. (Many times I translate new developments to the local community with explaining why, what is needed much, and I try to report feedback back.) The voting can be found here:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-22 Thread David Cuenca
It seems there was a problem in what the definition of success is. For the WMF success was to deploy the VE according to the plan and budget and to reach certain usage percentage. For the community it was a different kind of metric, maybe a more thoroughly tested product or a slower and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-22 Thread Liam Wyatt
On 23 July 2013 07:10, David Cuenca dacu...@gmail.com wrote: It seems there was a problem in what the definition of success is. For the WMF success was to deploy the VE according to the plan and budget and to reach certain usage percentage. For the community it was a different kind of metric,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-22 Thread Romaine Wiki
The problem is that the roll out schedule seems to be more important than the quality of the work itself. A deadline of roll out schedule is only a tool to plan things, but as usual with plans, is is called a plan and not actual situation so things can change due circumstances. If the work

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-22 Thread Erik Moeller
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 5:43 PM, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote: The concern is not about the validity of the Visual Editor project, or the quality of the work being done, but about the deployment process. Unfortunately, the rollout schedule for the visual editor was determined by the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-22 Thread Romaine Wiki
Hello Erik Möller, We're not going to solve these challenges if we lock away VisualEditor into some kind of laboratory and work in waterfall mode for another year. We have to make improvements every day, and get them into production every week, in order to find solutions that make sense.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-22 Thread MZMcBride
Erik Moeller wrote: We're not going to solve these challenges if we lock away VisualEditor into some kind of laboratory and work in waterfall mode for another year. We have to make improvements every day, and get them into production every week, in order to find solutions that make sense. That's
https://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=wikimedia-l%40lists.wikimedia.org&q=subject:%22%5C%5BWikimedia%5C-l%5C%5D+Feedback+for+the+Wikimedia+Foundation%22&o=newest
www.mail-archive.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2019-43
38204
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:Z6KIJPMHGF5ABPZAPWBVOKVVEWPEMT7G
<urn:uuid:7ee6d5e1-0dc3-4e2e-8c73-871012e76baf>
2019-10-18T06:22:30Z
72.52.77.8
text/html
sha1:5VQA7BLQZ2PN6C37EMTYLALLADYTES3P
<urn:uuid:221150a2-a8f5-49da-b92e-5c7ad9d5ff56>
https://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=wikimedia-l%40lists.wikimedia.org&q=subject:%22%5C%5BWikimedia%5C-l%5C%5D+Feedback+for+the+Wikimedia+Foundation%22&o=newest
response
<urn:uuid:9126576b-dae6-4b90-bce9-51f34cbd4a1d>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2019-43
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for October 2019
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-214.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.16 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.1-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/