Jump to content


Edited by author.
Last edit: 23:31, 27 November 2009

It's at http://liquidthreads.labs.wikimedia.org/wiki/Feedback (and, just FYI, at the top of every page using LiquidThreads on this wiki). I'll drop it on her talk page too. :)

~Philippe (WMF)23:20, 27 November 2009

I've been liberally reporting every Liquid Threads issue as I come across them. I suspect that using it on a discussion wiki, though annoying to participants (including me) is the only way to refine it and learn what's needed. That's my guess anyhow.

FT2 (Talk | email)23:26, 27 November 2009

Somebody's gotta be the beta group. In this case, we're it. :) For me, personally (and I know I'm the exception on a lot of things) I've found it to be a fantastic tool. The "new messages" feature is fantastic - I can read what's going on EVERYWHERE in one fell swoop. I love it. :)

~Philippe (WMF)23:32, 27 November 2009

It's clunky, but it's not even "beta" yet so no surprises.

FT2 (Talk | email)23:56, 27 November 2009

It would have been okay if someone had explained to me that this was a Beta and that I was a lab rat. Then I could have chosen to opt in or opt out. Giving a participant no upfront warning connotes that the technology or application being used has been released as relatively complete.

I still find this extremely annoying and I really just do not have the time to help refine this technology -- in truth it is just not what I am here for.

I think part of the issue is the same as the demographics Philippe identified -- I am a single parent who is a full time student. I CHOSE to participate here to help figure out what Wikipedia needs to do. I did NOT choose to participate as a lab rat to make a collaborative technology better. I ASSUMED that Wikipedia would give all of us, me included, a set of workable tools. As such, I am not interested in creating trouble logs every time I run into a problem. If that was the case, I would still be beta testing for Adobe.

Parents or anyone who has other life tasks that wholly consume them are not contributing because

1. they arent interested in being lab rats 2. they arent interested in making wholesale contributions that may be erased by someone else five minutes later 3. their time is extremely valuable -- when I choose to type in as I do now that is five or ten minutes less of me that my daughter gets.

CLEAR instructions, clear disclaimers, clear communication should all be a part of Wikipedia's brand. Right now, it is not.

Bhneihouse18:11, 28 November 2009

I've thought at times, we should sit down with a blank piece of paper (or screen) and ask, "what should the Wikipedia experience be like".

  • I'm a new user, how should I be guided and introduced?
  • I see a problem, what should my experience be?
  • I'm a fanatic on something, what should my experience be? (ie, how should I find myself gradually being brought to a halt)
FT2 (Talk | email)18:57, 28 November 2009

FT2, you just made my day! thanks, that is exactly where I have been getting to, and it talks to my "Beginning" monologue. Now, if we put your suggestion into the existing framework for Wikipedia and use it to "test" the various processes and procedures, I think we might have the litmus test we need for QC.


I am an editor. How should I feel as I work? I am an admin, what support do I need to do my job?


Bhneihouse20:30, 28 November 2009

Yes. I'm thinking more in terms of how it should be experienced, because that tends to guide how people feel. We know how we want people to feel (broadly) - enjoy it, positive, blah. But what's the hands-on practicalities of actual experience of editing or reading, that most gets them that, and what are the things that derail it (which need neutralizing). And then, we pick a handful of points to most guide 100k editors to maximize these.

FT2 (Talk | email)21:07, 28 November 2009