headers
Rob Schnautz | 5 Mar 2012 21:00
Picon

Invitation to help beta-test the MediaWiki 1.19 extension for the Wikipedia Education Program

The MediaWiki developers have been working hard to integrate certain elements of the Wikipedia Education
Program into MediaWiki. If anyone is interested in helping beta-test the new extension, click (or copy
and paste) the link below to get started:

http://education.wmflabs.org/index.php/MW_1.18:Community_portal/Welcome,_beta_testers!

Please note that this site does not will not represent official Wikipedia Education Program data. Feel
free to alter the data on the wiki however you wish; the more testing you do, the better!

Thanks,

Rob Schnautz
Online Communications Contractor
Global Development
Wikimedia Foundation

11450 Northridge Dr
Evansville IN 47720
c. 812.746.8347
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Anirudh Bhati | 6 Mar 2012 09:45
Picon

Re: Invitation to help beta-test the MediaWiki 1.19 extension for the Wikipedia Education Program

Thanks for the post, Rob.  Will an Education Program admin have the same
access levels as a sysop on the English Wikipedia?

On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:30 AM, Rob Schnautz <rschnautz <at> wikimedia.org>wrote:

> The MediaWiki developers have been working hard to integrate certain
> elements of the Wikipedia Education Program into MediaWiki. If anyone is
> interested in helping beta-test the new extension, click (or copy and
> paste) the link below to get started:
>
>
> http://education.wmflabs.org/index.php/MW_1.18:Community_portal/Welcome,_beta_testers
> !
>
> Please note that this site does not will not represent official Wikipedia
> Education Program data. Feel free to alter the data on the wiki however you
> wish; the more testing you do, the better!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Rob Schnautz
> Online Communications Contractor
> Global Development
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> 11450 Northridge Dr
> Evansville IN 47720
> c. 812.746.8347
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
Rob Schnautz | 6 Mar 2012 17:20
Picon

Re: Invitation to help beta-test the MediaWiki 1.19 extension for the Wikipedia Education Program

No, the "Education Program admin" refers to a volunteer administrator of the 
program, such as a regional or national ambassador. The title varies 
depending on what part of the world they operate in, so simply calling them 
"Education Program regional ambassador" doesn't quite line up on some 
individuals. I'm personally not fond of the "admin" nomenclature myself, as 
it does (as you point out) confuse the individual with sysops. We're open to 
other ideas for naming the user access level if you have any.

The users that are assigned this user access level will inherit privileges 
from the ep-instructor, ep-campus-ambassador, and ep-online-ambassador, and 
will be able to administer those user access levels. Other than that, it's a 
typical autoconfirmed user.

Thanks,
Rob

-----Original Message----- 
From: Anirudh Bhati
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 2:45 AM
To: English Wikipedia
Cc: mediawiki-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Invitation to help beta-test the MediaWiki 1.19 
extension for the Wikipedia Education Program

Thanks for the post, Rob.  Will an Education Program admin have the same
access levels as a sysop on the English Wikipedia?

On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:30 AM, Rob Schnautz <rschnautz <at> wikimedia.org>wrote:

> The MediaWiki developers have been working hard to integrate certain
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Oliver Keyes | 10 Mar 2012 12:16
Picon

Article Landing Pages - functional prototype to test and comment on

Hey guys

So, as you know, we have issues with how new pages are treated on
Wikipedia. A lot of the pages created by new editors simply aren't very
good; this is bad for the new editors, because their pages get deleted, and
bad for the new page patrollers who then have to wade through a tide of
junk. It’s also contributing to page patrollers being overworked.
 Recently, Engineering has been working on two projects that we hope will
hopefully improve the situation: Page Triage,[1] which is aimed at making
patrolling easier, and the Landing System:[2] a better way for new editors
to create articles. With these project we hope to both reduce the burden on
patrollers by making it easier to patrol, and by ensuring the articles that
are created are of higher quality.

The first of the two Engineering is working on, partly because it lends
itself to being broken out into smaller pieces of work, is the Landing
System. Currently, when a registered newbie clicks on a redlink, they get
automatically taken to an edit page where they can create the article, but
without any context as to what is actually happening.  With the proposed
system,  instead of seeing a blank edit window devoid of context, they'll
see a new page that gives them various options.[3] They can create an
article there, go through the article wizard, or go back to wherever they
were before if they didn't mean to end up at that URL. If a new editor
tries to create the article, they'll be informed that they need a
familiarity with policy, an absence of a COI and several references
(amongst other things) before the tool recommends they create it.[4] If
they don't have those things, they'll be directed to the Article Creation
Wizard.

This is an experiment. Our hypothesis is that this could help increase the
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 36 comments |
headers
Charles Matthews | 10 Mar 2012 13:38

Digital inclusion

I suppose we're in favour of it. I note that [[digital inclusion]] is a
redlink, for the reason that it was a redirect to [[e-inclusion]]; which
went down under a PROD in October of last year, as  "[[WP:OR|Original
research]] about a [[WP:NEO|non-notable neologism]]". Something of a
disaster, given that "digital inclusion" is a notable neologism.

Anyone prepared to revive? A good cause.

Charles
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Charles Matthews | 10 Mar 2012 13:44

Re: Article Landing Pages - functional prototype to test and comment on

On 10 March 2012 11:16, Oliver Keyes <okeyes <at> wikimedia.org> wrote:

 <snip>

Currently, when a registered newbie clicks on a redlink, they get
> automatically taken to an edit page where they can create the article, but
> without any context as to what is actually happening.  With the proposed
> system,  instead of seeing a blank edit window devoid of context, they'll
> see a new page that gives them various options.[3] They can create an
> article there, go through the article wizard, or go back to wherever they
> were before if they didn't mean to end up at that URL.

What sensible newbies really would need is (i) a place to draft, and (ii)
advice on drafting.

If a new editor
> tries to create the article, they'll be informed that they need a
> familiarity with policy, an absence of a COI and several references
> (amongst other things) before the tool recommends they create it.[4] If
> they don't have those things, they'll be directed to the Article Creation
> Wizard.
>
> I.e. you put the barriers to entry before anything else. This could be
detrimental, you know.

> This is an experiment. Our hypothesis is that this could help increase the
> quality of new articles and reduce patrollers’ workload, while making the
> process more welcoming at the same time.
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
Oliver Keyes | 10 Mar 2012 13:55
Picon

Re: Article Landing Pages - functional prototype to test and comment on

> Currently, when a registered newbie clicks on a redlink, they get
> > automatically taken to an edit page where they can create the article,
> but
> > without any context as to what is actually happening.  With the proposed
> > system,  instead of seeing a blank edit window devoid of context, they'll
> > see a new page that gives them various options.[3] They can create an
> > article there, go through the article wizard, or go back to wherever they
> > were before if they didn't mean to end up at that URL.
>
>
> What sensible newbies really would need is (i) a place to draft, and (ii)
> advice on drafting.
>
In a way they've already got that through things like Articles for Creation
(which I would love to see us support better, on the software side. I can't
promise anything, though).

> If a new editor
> > tries to create the article, they'll be informed that they need a
> > familiarity with policy, an absence of a COI and several references
> > (amongst other things) before the tool recommends they create it.[4] If
> > they don't have those things, they'll be directed to the Article Creation
> > Wizard.
> >
> > I.e. you put the barriers to entry before anything else. This could be
> detrimental, you know.
>
> Quite possibly; that's why, as said below, it's an experiment. It may be
that it reduces the number of incoming articles without any substantial
increase in quality. It may be it reduces the number, but increases the
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Fred Bauder | 10 Mar 2012 14:11
Gravatar

Re: Digital inclusion

> I suppose we're in favour of it. I note that [[digital inclusion]] is a
> redlink, for the reason that it was a redirect to [[e-inclusion]]; which
> went down under a PROD in October of last year, as  "[[WP:OR|Original
> research]] about a [[WP:NEO|non-notable neologism]]". Something of a
> disaster, given that "digital inclusion" is a notable neologism.
>
> Anyone prepared to revive? A good cause.
>
> Charles

I think we probably have a substantial article on digital divide. Perhaps
both of these could redirect to a section there. Perhaps
Digital_divide#Overcoming_the_digital_divide That could be further
developed including both those terms, if they are in use.

Fred

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
David Gerard | 10 Mar 2012 14:46
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Article Landing Pages - functional prototype to test and comment on

On 10 March 2012 12:55, Oliver Keyes <okeyes <at> wikimedia.org> wrote:

> In a way they've already got that through things like Articles for Creation
> (which I would love to see us support better, on the software side. I can't
> promise anything, though).

The problem with AFC is that hardly anyone cares to review (me
included). Perhaps it could be streamlined ... but then it's basically
another Special:Newpages queue.

> Primarily the idea that a chunk of potential and attempted editors are
> ignorant, rather than malicious; I'd hope we would all agree that this is
> the case. Note that we're not deploying this; we're asking for comments on
> the implementation itself so we can make it the best (or, if you disagree
> with the premise, least-bad) tool it can be. Once it's developed, it'll be
> deployed in a bucketed format for say, 5 percent of newbies  We can find
> out if the hypothesis is accurate without overworking people.

Sounds workably plausible.

- d.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Charles Matthews | 10 Mar 2012 15:48

Re: Article Landing Pages - functional prototype to test and comment on

On 10 March 2012 12:55, Oliver Keyes <okeyes <at> wikimedia.org> wrote:

>
> > If a new editor
> > > tries to create the article, they'll be informed that they need a
> > > familiarity with policy, an absence of a COI and several references
> > > (amongst other things) before the tool recommends they create it.[4] If
> > > they don't have those things, they'll be directed to the Article
> Creation
> > > Wizard.
> > >
> > > I.e. you put the barriers to entry before anything else. This could be
> > detrimental, you know.
> >
> > Quite possibly; that's why, as said below, it's an experiment. It may be
> that it reduces the number of incoming articles without any substantial
> increase in quality. It may be it reduces the number, but increases the
> quality. It may be that by providing clearer guidance and making people
> aware that they can contribute, it increases one or the other or both
> without detriment. We simply don't know: but we want to find out :).
>
> I'm particularly concerned that ham-fisted reference to the COI guideline
could put off good and conscientious people we do want editing, while
having no effect on those who are motivated in such a way as to have an
actual COI.

Charles
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |

Gmane