It would be great if there was a way to indicate that you have replied to an editor's frustration with coaching or a fix, so other editors would know the issue has been addressed. - PKM (talk) 17:47, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If the overall tool proves useful, that's definitely something we'd like to add. One idea is to add inline-commenting directly to the dashboard, so that it's easy to see who has responded to what (see screenshot). Do you think that would make sense? ---Eloquence*19:21, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is this a WMF effort? I must say I'm impressed: it's one of the most novel, and from the looks of it efficient notions that MediaWiki developers came up with, which I think will inevitably boost the current declining editorship. Thanks, whoever came up with this idea! -- Mentifisto21:19, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! We drew a lot of inspiration from the Firefox Input Dashboard. Aakash Desai, who was the product manager of that program, presented his findings and approach to WMF, which helped inform many of the UI decisions that went into both the MoodBar and the feedback dashboard. User:Jorm (WMF) is the responsible UI designer on our end, and User:Werdna and User:Catrope did the bulk of the development work on the dashboard.--Eloquence*23:47, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
on
I selected a comment on the dashboard: the feedback dashboard and responded to the user directly on his talk page. There doesn't seem to be a way to indicate that I have responded on the dashboard page.
Is it possible to indicate whether a comment has been responded to or not?
What is to be done when a user is already indefinately blocked after a couple of small inconsidered edits? Most of the time they have not received a welcome message. When I see a user getting into trouble who has never received a welcome template, I have been told on my talk page not to give that user one. They then don't have a chance to read the useful links on it so he can have an opportunity to learn and avoid being blocked.
Most of the users that are having difficulty are operating in a huge vacuum of information and then they get slammed after a couple of edited by a vandal fighter in a hostile message with a couple of confusing links. But it is not allowed to try to give them useful links as are in the Welcome template?
There is much hostility to new users, I fear. Seeing this happen, I realize why Wikipedia drives potential editors away.
My observations reflect KennethSides, that new editors are treated poorly and not allowed to slowly learn our rules and slowly come up to speed. New editors have no input and are often confused about how to do various tasks and what is proper/improper. This is a great concern of mine as it directly affects our long-term viability as a project. - Hydroxonium (T•C•V) 06:59, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kenneth,
thanks for your comments!
Regarding your question how to show who responded to what, this is definitely in the works. We're still figuring out the best way to do it. If you have thoughts on that, this page is a good place to post them.
Regarding your overall comments: This is exactly the dynamic we hoped to illuminate. We've seen this in various statistics, but nothing is as powerful as the stories of individuals. Take this new editor, for example. He was attempting to make good faith additions to an article, but was reverted, in the course of which he's been implied to be a spammer and a vandal, and threatened with a block.
New users are wading into an incredibly complex world with very few tools and little guidance, and it's very easy to trip and fall. When policies prevent you from being friendly to new users, I would strongly suggest ignoring them. Civility is one of the five pillars and the importance of openness and friendliness has even been emphasized by the Board of Trustees in its resolution on openness. The very first recommendation of the Board is:
"Treating new editors with patience, kindness, and respect; being aware of the challenges facing new editors, and reaching out to them; and encouraging others to do the same"
Funny you should mention that user, Erik. That was one of the ones I was thinking about. The other was the student trying to do her homework assignment that got deleted, which caused her to make the comment about the deleting admin that had to be removed. I'll not be more specific for obvious privacy reasons, but her parent made a plea to have the article undeleted long enough to copy it in to a Word document. Very sad how that user was treated. It's my belief that we can do much better than this. - Hydroxonium (T•C•V) 11:56, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
KennethSides/Hydroxonium, thanks for your comments. As Eloquence said, we are working on a response system that would enable editors to see whether a comment has been responded to. This system would enable an experienced editor to respond to the new editor's comment directly from the Feedback Dashboard. The new editor would then receive this comment as a message on their talk page. Here's a mockup of what this form might look like. If you'd like to participate in the development of this feature, please drop us a message on the project page.
Hi Kenneth. That is indeed an egregiously unwarranted block. Especially since the article hasn't even been deleted. If you'd like to contest the block with the admin (User:Alexf) I would encourage you to do so. If you're not comfortable, I can do so. Let me know, Steven Walling (WMF) • talk19:04, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I thought about approaching the admin (User:Alexf), especially as the editor had not even received a warning, but I am reluctant to interfere. I tried once before to help in a situation where an editor had received a warning but had received no "Welcome" template, so I added one and was rebuked by the admin. (From my point of view, giving even a misbehaving editor the information in a "Welcome" templete could help out, but I was wrong.)
Yes, from the limited information I can see, it appears we did not handle the situation very well. However, there are 19 deleted contribs, so it's possible the account was a serial spammer. I'll leave a note for the blocking admin and ask for his input. - Hydroxonium (T•C•V) 23:25, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article was not speedy deleted because it is sourced and seems notable. COI and maybe advertising, for sure but that is another issue. The editor's username is in direct violation of GROUPNAME and they blatantly came to edit the article on their own company. If they had edited something else, unrelated, then maybe. As is they are free and welcome to request a change of name if they want, or start a new account. They can also request an unblock if they feel the name is not in violation. The instruction for these were given in to the user in their own Talk Page. -- Alexf(talk)01:45, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please add a feature to hide all empty requests and (if possible) where the user filled in the request (so if he/she was at the mainpage, then this should be showed.). This would be sometimes very helpful to answer somequestions/provide feedback. Also some kind of automated generated archives might be useful to check the feedback requests of the last few days. mabdul12:26, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hey folks, Maryana and I are interested in holding an IRC office hours about the Feedback Dashboard response team. We'd like as many of you to be able to attend as possible, so I was going to propose we do it on Wednesday the 30th at 22:00 UTC time. Please chime in if earlier or later would work better for you. I know that time is particularly bad for folks in India and elsewhere in Asia, so we are happy to hold a second one at a better time for them. Thanks, Steven Walling (WMF) • talk21:27, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, 2200 UTC is a little bit early for me. Could we do it an three or so hours later? Just wondering, because I have commitments until about 0030 the next day in that instance. If it could be moved to 0100 on the 1st of December that would be great (would be 8:00 EST in the US). If this wouldn't work for others then it's okay, because I know that 8:00 is late for some. Thanks! gwickwire(talktome)(contribs!)22:54, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the invitation. I personally don't 'do' IRC, but I'd be interested to see a report on your discussion. You might want to notify The Signpost, too. --Dweller (talk) 23:37, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the invite, Steven. I don't have access to IRC (long story), but I would be very interested in a summary of what was talked about. Thanks much. - Hydroxonium (T•C•V) 12:42, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I find that the visual display is helpful and appealing and the short twitter like messages are nice too.
I think having someone go and do a little project to look at some sampling of the editors and find some trends would be nice. See what demographics or experiences lead to satisfaction/dissatisfaction. There are probably users that are not well suited to Wiki, who end up unhappy regardless of fair treatment. Then there may be others who could become good contributors that are driven off by bad interactions. Some work to figure this out would be good.
Welcome back, TCO. Your efforts here were appreciated and it would be nice to have you back. Then there may be others who could become good contributors that are driven off by bad interactions. This is what I'm most concerned with. I think we should embrace any sincere effort of a new user to become a Wikipedian. All the best. - Hydroxonium (T•C•V) 12:56, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, thanks to everyone for joining the Response Team! I'm really looking forward to exploring this area of engagement between new editors and our experienced hands.
I wanted to let everyone know that this afternoon, we introduced an early version of reply functionality. The "Respond to this" links associated with each comment open up a dialog where you can enter your reply, which then gets posted directly on the user's talk page. There are, however, a number of important features missing:
Wikitext support. Wikitext support is essential since many replies include links to other WP pages (e.g., I've seen Steven Walling use cheatsheet a lot).
Indication of existing reply. Right now, there is no indication of whether someone has already replied to a comment.
Preview. There is currently no ability to preview a reply.
Talk page message. The format of the message that is left on the new editor's talk page is a bit wonky (e.g., the signature is at a strange location, the reference to the original Moodbar comment is not entirely clear).
There is quite a bit of additional work we need to do before the reply feature can support the workflows of the Response Team in a meaningful way. We hope to get another rev out within two weeks which fixes these and other items. In the meantime, it's probably better for folks to reply to Moodbar comments the old fashion way. Howief (talk) 07:17, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Hydoxonium. Yes, feature is currently requires javascript. I'm not sure whether we're going to implement a non-javascript version at this point. Right now, our rule of thumb for "special features" such this one is that we require javascript since javascript enables us to design more fluid user interfaces. We do have a policy of graceful degradation for essential features such as editing (i.e., the editor should not require javascript, so if a user doesn't have javascript enabled, they should still be able to edit, just without the new features). At this point, I don't think the reply functionality qualifies as an essential feature since only a handful of people are using it, at least from what I can tell. But if usage increases and enough people want a non-JS version, we'll definitely considering implementing one, probably using pre-loaded text, as you suggested. Just curious, do you have JS disabled on your browser? I'm asking because we actually know very little about the browser environment of our heavy editors. (Please feel free not to answer or to private message me.). Howief (talk) 01:28, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Howie. Thanks for all the great work. I think the feedback dashboard has been really helpful and think it will be even more so as others join in helping our newest members. Regarding your question, I use a free dialup ISP for low-income residents. It's only 28.8K and highly restricted (no NNTP, no SMTP, etc.) and the HTTP is restricted to port 80 only and there's no flash, no javascript, etc.. So I can't use many of our tools, like Twinkle, unless I go to the library for my internet connection. It's a pain sometimes, but free is all I can afford. So I end up noticing which features are javascript-based since I can't use them. I expect my situation is unique, so I'm probably not very representative of other users. Best regards. - 64.40.61.120 (talk) 00:44, 30 November 2011 (UTC) That was me. I guess I lost my cookies. - Hydroxonium (T•C•V) 00:51, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please add the ability to instantly flag/report grossly-unacceptable feedback
In the event that a vandal decides to abuse the feedback system by posting grossly offensive, defamatory, or purely-disruptive material, there should be a mechanism that non-admins can utilize to instantly alert administrators (and even blank out the feedback if it's a blatant bad-faith attack). --SoCalSuperEagle(talk)20:09, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I just tried to find the earliest comments that had not yet got a response. Eeep! As the days roll by my finger starts to ache. Could a simple method be added to zip to the end and/or hide all already answered posts? As a user, I can't imagine feeling very smiley if I were encouraged to provide feedback and a week later nobody had responded because they couldn't actually find my feedback.
Nice and simple look to it. Easy to see it being an awesome tool (once more fully developed). Will try responding etc. later, but am not in the right frame of mind right this minute. fredgandt20:34, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
P.s. In fact it might be simplest and most effective to be able to turn the whole list upside down and start from the bottom/oldest first/top. Combined with hiding already answered, we'd be like Speedy Gonzales after a strong curry! fredgandt
I think the disadvantage of starting oldest-to-earliest is that you're talking to people who've already given up and left Wikipedia. Much better to start with the latest and really help even just one or two people who are here right now and need help. There is a chance the ones weeks old might be fruitful, but it's slim. Steven Walling (WMF) • talk22:08, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I find that really quite bleak. If that's the case, I'd suggest a fall-off time of n hours, after which the entries simply vanish. As for hiding (togglable perhaps) already answered: I still think that would make life simpler and if freshness is the order of the day, fresher. Any new feedback from a user would still show. fredgandt22:29, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This one probably isn't a "quick fix" like the signature one, but ... is there a way to toggle the header down/off? To reply to a query like this, a template like {{w-shout}} may be an appropriate answer. Unfortunately, it looks just a little weird if it has a Feedback header above it. Obviously we'd want to reference the feedback in any case, but in the cases where a header would be awkward, perhaps we could just use a "This message was in response to your feedback here ~~~~" statement after the contents of the reply. --PhilosopherLet us reason together.10:43, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
After brief mention of this during the IRC office hour, I've cobbled (really) together a user script and template. Add the template to (for example) your talk page or sandbox (wherever) and import the user script (works with the vector skin and probably a few others), and you'll see an un-styled and stripped down, scrollable embedding of Special:FeedbackDashboard.
If anyone is interested in this being developed, I'll do that. All links etc in the embedding will take you to the Special page so it will only allow looking at the entries (basically non functional window onto the page). However, what I imagine being possibly useful (this set-up really isn't), would be to have a permanent expandable div fixed to your UI so wherever you are you can check up on the dashboard, without having to really go anywhere.
Anyway, it was just a thought and what I've made is a bit rubbish, but as I say, if enough people wants it developed, I'll do that (within reason).
Add this to your common.js or your vector.jsimportScript("User:Fred Gandt/embedFeedbackDashboard.js"); Contains no on load hook so needs to be called from within one. If you don't know what that means, add this:
For it to be fully styled and functional would require importing some stylesheets and scripting from Special:FeedbackDashboard into the user script (or via it), and possibly chopping up quite a bit of html. I can imagine it getting quite complex, and haven't really looked into it yet. I set this demo up in somewhat of a hurry. It's extremely rough. If enough people want the idea expanded I can certainly try. Personally I prefer the idea of a portable expanding div fixed to the UI that can be opened wherever you are to check in on the dashboard. Then if you feel like responding to any of them, simply navigate to the proper page. Again, I can try and make almost anything, but if only a handfull of people are interested it might not really be worth the effort. Hopefully you understand. fredgandt08:24, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've requested speedy deletion of both the script and template. The script has gone already, the template is on it's way (hopefully). If anyone wants the idea developed, contact me. Although as it was, it was just a demo of a possible idea, far better to implement at the source by WMF devs. fredgandt02:13, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Brilliant! This is a seriously efficient way of helping new users get help. I can see myself getting almost addicted to it. I'm all over the place (most of the time) right now and have only replied to two, but think it rocks! Just wanted to enthuse fredgandt04:46, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Transcript from the office hours about FeedbackDashboard
Two-thirds of the way through the text gets magically smaller. Also, I would love if there could be another one, as I totally forgot about this one (phone calendar...). Thanks for the transcript though! gwickwire(talktome)(contribs!)04:29, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I find that I have to click the preview button twice to see a preview. This is mildly annoying. However, it would be great if the same could be said of the "Send" button. I have a couple of times, almost sent an incomplete message while previewing it.
Could those feedbacks that are currently being responded to be live updated to show that someone is in the process of responding? Then since anything could happen between beginning to respond and actually sending the response, if the response is not sent the entry shows as if nothing had ever happened, and that it still needs a response.
This happened at a users talk page just now. While I was typing, Eloquence sent a response. I had no way of knowing this, and subsequently two responses to the same feedback arrived within 4 minutes of each other. That's overkill and tantamount to biting. Best to avoid it if possible. fredgandt06:56, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Could we have a "click here to provide feedback on this feedback" link sent with all feedback, that when followed would allow the user to send to our talk page feedback on our feedback? For the sake of keeping track (and sanity) the message that landed on our talk page should include a link to both the original feedback we replaied to, and our feedback to it (on their talk page).
Although it perhaps appears that I am messing about, I'm really not. It would be invaluable to know if what we are saying is helping or not. fredgandt07:33, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps, but I've already seen at least one editor who seemed to think that sending feedback was the only way to communicate with people. Perhaps a "click here to edit your talk page to provide feedback on this feedback" link? --PhilosopherLet us reason together.08:15, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Can we get a "mark as responded" option? If I see an editor who has a redlink for his talk page on the Feedback Dashboard, I'm going to give him a welcome template. If he has a feedback comment, I'm going to want to reply to that at the same time ... but that'll mean that the Dashboard won't know about my reply. --PhilosopherLet us reason together.08:36, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In the meantime an option could be to use{{subst:Wtw}} or {{subst:Welcome to Wikipedia}} that has an option to set the heading to level 3 (i.e. ===Heading===). So you can respond to the feedback via the interface and add the welcome template as a subsection of the response. The template also allows the inclusion of an extra message (although I don't think the presentation would be appropriate for use in the case of responding to feedback). I'm thinking of possibly building a specialised template for responding. fredgandt08:59, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think a specialized welcome template would be the solution, though ... I would propose a container template for the existing welcome templates - I usually use {{WelcomeMenu}} (the one I wish I'd been welcomed with) or, occasionally, {{w-shout}} or {{welcome-belated}} - but the real problem is that the welcome template needs to be able to go above the "in response to your feedback" header. --PhilosopherLet us reason together.22:19, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If a new editor has a specific question or frustration, they are probably more interested in the answer to that (in addition to just seeing someone cares to help) rather than an impersonal welcome template. The aim in those templates is very positive, but in implementation I think they are often overwhelming. We've been providing newbies with welcome templates like that for years, and our retention numbers keep getting worse... Steven Walling (WMF) • talk01:22, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It is entirely possible that reduced retention is caused as a natural effect of equilibrium. Every edit takes every article one step closer to what established editors will consider complete. However right they may or may not be, the effect will be that as Wikipedia grows, fewer edits will be considered worthy of inclusion. Therefore the new editors are more and more likely to have their work reverted. Feeling that it is pointless to try when their work is simply undone, is bound to drive a lot of new editors away. There is a lot of conjecture there, but equilibrium is a natural condition in all of the known universe. The more cooks there are the fewer will be made to feel welcome by the already huge number of cooks presently trying to stop the broth from being spoiled. I would imagine there is a direct correlation between the number of articles and the number of editors. As new article creation slows, we should therefore expect new editor retention to also slow.
There are so many articles left to do though! We have better coverage of Antarctica than Africa, for instance. It's facts like these that don't lead me to believe what we at the Foundation call the "gold rush theory". Also, you're not a madman Fred. :-) Steven Walling (WMF) • talk02:25, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Feedback dashboard is greatm but some of the user comment are clearly page specific. Would it be possible to add the visiting page to the dashboard to get a greater understanding of the users comment. Regards, SunCreator(talk)14:36, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, we're already collecting the page info. We're working on a way to make it optional/clear to the submitter that the page title is going to be publicly displayed and will then disclose it for comments past a cut-off date where the submitter has agreed to the disclosure.--Eloquence*15:45, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest SunCreator, that template is not something we should be giving any newbies. I understand the attempt is to be friendly, but as you can see from the Feedback Dashboard, new editors find our number of policies, rules, help pages, guidelines, and noticeboards really overwhelming. The great thing about this feedback system is that new editors have the opportunity to let us know if they were wondering about any specific issue. Unless they are talking about a topic, I don't think we should be giving anyone a large list of links. Steven Walling (WMF) • talk01:20, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How about this: Instead of an automatic welcome, dashboard people are given a check box with the option to welcome the newbie? That way, people that really need it (and look like good contributors) will get a welcome template, but not everyone will. ~ MatthewrbowkerTalk to me00:53, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
With all the junk that's been implemented over time, this one is about the most useful tool ever. Until it was brought up in a signpost-discussion yesterday, I didn't even know it existed, and I do have quite a few VillagePump-and-whatnot pages on my watchlist. Thanks. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556> haneʼ23:37, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
One thing that is occurring to me about new users, is that I don't think they know how to edit and respond on talk pages. They will get the yellow tab at the top of screen when they get new messages, click on it, and get sent to their talk page. It is not obvious to them how they can respond to messages they receive. People are used to email, personal messaging and forums, our system of communication is horrible.
One thing that could be changed for instance, is instead of using words like edit it could say respond or reply. Wikipedia should at least use real world terminology. Mattg82 (talk) 21:45, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is definitely a big problem not just for the Moodbar, but for the entirety of Wikipedia. We designed (and I believe already implemented) a special email notification specifically for new editors who give feedback via Moodbar. It's a lot cleaner and friendlier than the current email notification that's automatically sent when an editor's talk page is edited, so it's hopefully a step in the right direction of guiding newbies to their talk page and letting them know they can modify it. But anything you as a responder can do to make your responses more real-world friendly is definitely great, too :) Maryana (WMF) (talk) 21:55, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've been using the new Feedback Dashboard, and there are two enhancements I'd love to see happen:
I'm using the Navigation Pop-ups gadget, which means that in the Feedback Dashboard I can preview new editors' contributions and talk pages by mousing over the link titles. This gadget makes it way faster for me to evaluate new editors' behaviour thus far, which helps me figure out whether and how to respond to them. In FD, my problem is that this only works for the first page of results. Once I click "More," any new results won't let me preview. Usually this results in me stopping responding after the first page of results, because evaluating the new editors after the first page is too clunky and slow. I would appreciate if you could fix this, such that preview continued to work past the first page of results.
Currently when I interact with the queue it doesn't change much: there's a small notification that I've responded to someone, but that's it. I would find it more satisfying if I could dismiss items in the queue after I had dealt with them or decided to ignore them. Maybe they could grey out, or disappear. I think feedback responders would feel a greater sense of accomplishment, and would also provide more responses per session, if we were visibly working our way through the queue, and got some kind of success message at the end.
Also: I like the leaderboard. I definitely want to beat Tom Morris! He has only four points; I know I can do it :-)
Whilst I can see the merits in the Blanket response idea, at present the process of navigating to the appropriate subpage, going into Edit mode (to pick up the links), copying, navigating back to the dashboard and pasting the response seems a bit onerous... Is there any chance of a function whereby the dashboard would present a button or drop-down menu with which to insert stock responses?
Or is there one there already, and I've just missed it?
Hi Yunshui. There's two approaches that you could use to make the process faster.
Have all the different feedbacks open in tabs (possibly in a separate browser window), then you just select the one you need and come back.
What I do: have all the feedback together in a txt document saved on your desktop and copy and paste out of that. The advantages of this second option is that you can refine the feedback as you go (for the larger blocks of feedback). Do feel free to improve upon and add links to the templates on my user page too btw.
I agree though, a stock response would be a nice feature, so long as it is covered by guidance that it should be complimented by a personal comment where appropriate. Garemoko (talk) 16:56, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would really like this feature too...perhaps instead of how Twinkle works (puts the whole template on the page, allows for a comment near the bottom), the drop down list (or whatever) would simply place the text of the stock reply into the text box allowing a respondent to edit it as they see fit, even adding multiple replies and making them work together. In any case, I would certainly be interested in assisting with the crafting of such replies...if you'd like. --Non-Dropframetalk04:18, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This page seems mostly to be about technical aspects of the process.
Is there a place for discussing feedback in terms of what responders have noticed about the recurring difficulties that are experienced by new users, users with English as a Second Language, minors, follow up experiences etc.?
It is some years since I registered. Is there a way to experience the process so that I can see what new users experience when they first log on? (I don't want to be accused of being a sockpuppet of myself, I have enough trouble managing the original :-) !!))--Harkey (talk) 19:57, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Harkey, thanks for the thoughtful comments. Since the usual person best for answering these type of questions at the Wikimedia Foundation is out of town right now, I'll take a stab at answering...
For question one: there isn't a place specific for this feature, but if we want to create a list of recurring issues that people should be aware of (e.g. "What kind of feedback to expect, and how to answer it") that would be fantastic. Any preference you have for where that could live is welcome, though you're also welcome to start a thread here with your reflections before we move it to a more structured place. :)
It's actually perfectly fine for you to create a test account to see the registration process. You just need to declare that it's a legitimate sock, if you want to cross your Ts and dot your Is. ;) (If you want to see the way new editors see the tool for collecting feedback, you don't even need to save an edit. Just hit the edit button and cancel.)
Thanks for your reply. I was on a short Wikibreak. I shall give the ideas a bit more thought. I am away all next week so I have plenty of time to think. Thanks again.--Harkey (talk) 18:50, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
When I try to respond to feedback, I'm getting a message saying "Oops! You've exceeded your rate limit. Please wait some time and try again." Two questions; first, is this, as I assume, the result of an anti-vandal fix designed to stem the flood of spambots last week, and second, how long is "some time"? Yunshui雲水10:20, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've just encountered this and I think it was because I had to go through 3 of those daft Captchas, when trying to Publish. Really dread getting those as I can't tell what some of the letters are meant to be. SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 11:13, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The new editors often comment on the page they are currently looking at..... this information is not available to the responding editor. If the 'new editor' has edited several pages you have to guess which the comment refers to (or maybe none of them). Please consider some way of 'seeing' the page they were on when the feedback is entered. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 00:16, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is something we've talked about a lot and at the end of the day it boils down to privacy. We can't know if a user intends to reveal the page they were on at the time of leaving feedback, so we can't reveal that information.--Jorm (WMF) (talk) 01:44, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My suspicion is that some newly registered editors may have abandoned editing (in frustration!) before any response is made. Is there any way to monitor the correlation between response time to feedback and subsequent editor behavior, please? --Harkey (talk) 17:36, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just a few preliminary remarks--- :-) Some responses to feedback may never be seen because it is not immediately clear how the new user is communicated with/communicates with others via their talk page. I tried creating a new account and there was no information about the My talk tab and the orange stripe until someone (my alter ego!) had first communicated with me, which could be hours later when the user has logged out, never to be seen again. I think the information about how to use My talk needs to be up there, immediately, as soon as a new account is created. Otherwise, how are we to offer help? I think some people could log out in panic or frustration before we have had a chance to welcome them or influence their behaviour.
It is also true, as some new users have pointed out, that the Edit button does not appear before you click on My talk. What it it actually says is "Create" which could be interpreted as, Create a page or Create this page. I can see why new users start to create a new article on their User page or User talk page.--Harkey (talk) 14:36, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We care about your feedback and will answer your call shortly, please stay on the line.
(copying my original comment and responses from the village pump)
This is so cool, it (accidentally) reflects the (too often) WDGAF about you to newbies. I love it, there is no clue given as to where it comes from and it takes a good deal of clicking to get to anything that resembles someone to talk to, nice corporate feel, I should complain to my congressman about this. I give it a thwumbs up Penyulap ☏12:23, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It took me quite a while to translate your sarcasm into an actual concern, so if you "GAF" about the rest of us, I'd tone that down a bit (and not just here). I see Wikipedia:New editor feedback as your average customer survey. I don't think it's any more mysterious than that (it "comes from" Wikipedia, will people really be wondering any more than that?). I never participate in them personally, and don't see why any thinking person would want to, but that's just me. As for getting to talk to a person, I don't think we make that too difficult. Aside from being able to post to any user's talk page at any time, the sidebar's Help gets you to the help desk in three clicks (Help → Ask questions → Help desk). I suppose we could make it 1 and just put Help desk right in the sidebar, since we are indeed not paying the people who respond, so who cares if they have to work alot? Equazcion(talk) 14:53, 28 Apr 2012 (UTC)
(quoting Equazicon's response)Oh and about the grayed-out button, I don't know for sure but the negative character count seems to be saying you went over your allotted feedback length. I'll wait for someone who knows more about that feature to come comment. I'm not sure how mysterious that is either though -- YouTube has a similar count/limit for comments, as do other sites, and we all know the genius it takes to comment in those places. Equazcion(talk) 14:53, 28 Apr 2012 (UTC)
(copying my response)It's not sarcasm Equazcion, I firmly believe that an image presented should reflect experience likely to be found, and this one does. Seriously, who does actually care about new users here ? a minority at best. I think it's more likely cynicism, but not sarcasm, if you called me cynical in that remark, well, I guess I'd own that.
I may have gone past the twitter sized comment enforcement policy by moving my original comment down, replacing it with a comment on the button. I'll take up the issues raised on the board you point to, thanks. Penyulap ☏23:59, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are a few problems with this banner, it needs at the bare minimum a link for feedback about itself so that experienced as well as new editors can comment on it's bugs, suggest a link to this page is inserted into the banner.
It would be a good idea that if there is a comment size enforcement, that it is explained to new editors, and if they wish to leave a longer comment they are given a link to a place that they may do so.
I respond to feedback from time to time, and I have noticed that new users often reply to your message on their talk page. It would be nice for there to be a button to watch the user's talk page on the special feedback page, so that they are not just sending messages into the void.... Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:56, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Add a report user button on each feedback comment that fades out when the curser is not on the feedback comment (just like the (link to here) link.)
Have a exit "X" at the top right corner of each feedback comment that lets you ignore the feedback comment and fades out when the curser is not on the feedback comment (just like the (link to here) link.)
These may have already been mentioned but I thought I would mention them again anyways.
Hey. I'm a new editor, but a quick learner and I think I could probably answer a lot of the feedback. After receiving a response to my feedback a week later, I decided to join the project so I could help. A quick look made me realize why feedback takes so long to answer: 90% of it is junk. As far as I can tell, there's no way to delete the junk feedback. Maybe that privilege should be given to a few dedicated editors? ʝunglejill15:40, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Jungle! Thanks for the great suggestion and I am glad that I'm not the only one who thinks the Feedback Dashboard needs a user right but it has already been brought up with staff. The respone from a staff member was "I'm not sure how quickly they'd be able to get to this, since they're busy with the NewPages Feed (new New Page Patrol tool) right now, but I'll try my best to argue your case."
Well, in that case maybe everyone should be able to delete, and a list of deleted feedback sent to a couple of editors for review. I think few enough people find themselves here, so the possibility for vandalism is low. ʝunglejill06:58, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
They have something like that on WP:AFTV5. Rollbackers, reviewers, and admins can hide feedback, and oversighters can WP:OVERSIGHT it. Perhaps a similar option could be added to the feedback dashboard? David121721:31, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Worse than just "junk" feedback, I have just seen a feedback which was used to post a WP:BLP violation. Wikipedia policy is clear: BLP violations anywhwere are deleted immediately. However, how do I get it deleted? As far as I know, this is the only sort of page that anyone can post to and that administrators can't edit or delete. I looked for something telling me where to go to get it deleted, and found nothing. I see references above to "staff", but I see nothing anywhere telling me how to contact the "staff". It is totally unacceptable that this way for people to evade the BLP policy should exist, and it bewilders me how the people who created the system can have failed to realise that this would be an issue. It also amazes me that it is so difficult to find out how to contact the people who can do something about it. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:12, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I previously talked to Maryana (WMF). JamesBWatson, are you saying that administrators can not remove feedback? I thought they could :/ -- Cheers, Riley HuntleytalkNo talkback needed; I'll temporarily watch here.02:29, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey folks. On a related note, I've filed a bug requesting that we extend the ability to hide/unhide posts to all autoconfirmed editors, not just sysops. This isn't deletion, and based on the amount of unresolved comments that are vague or otherwise not very easy to respond to with a substantial comment, I think it's a pretty low risk thing to do. Right now there is not permanent deletion on the Feedback Dashboard, but if someone wants to file a request for that too, that is the best way of getting the attention of developers. Steven Walling (WMF) • talk18:38, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, so we made this change and it was to be rolled out Monday, but the Foundation's legal team objected to opening up hiding this way, since it is the only way to deal with content that would normally be candidates for revdeletion or oversight. We'll try to work it out, and in the meantime I encourage anyone who wants deletion as a feature to request it on Bugzilla. Steven Walling (WMF) • talk21:15, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I actually think that hiding comments that don't deserve an answer is counterproductive (more work, and there aren't very many active responders as is). Perhaps it should be like AFTv5, where only disruptive comments are hidden, and where reviewers and rollbackers can hide feedback. David1217What I've done23:20, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But it is quite easy to hide them, and there will be less to read for someone going over the list later. I do not think it counterproductive. Lectonar (talk) 07:32, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Update: The ability for sysops to delete has been coded and is being tested pre-deployment. Follow T42729 if you're interested, and we'll be sure to announce something when this is deployed. (Extending hiding to more people can come after this or at the same time.) Steven Walling (WMF) • talk03:58, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In the last days I could not fail but notice a decline in numbers in our usual responders for the New editor feedback. This may be due to holidays (and I know we are all volunteers here), but more eyes and hands would be appreciated. If it is any kind of incentive, I can offer some barnstars in return. Lectonar (talk) 13:13, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think it might be worthwhile to try and recruit people from the Welcoming Committee to join as responders? Welcoming is similar work, but you get so little feedback from newbies that it's kind of depressing sometimes. I think the Dashboard is much more rewarding. Steven Walling (WMF) • talk17:50, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Could be (as I got much more barnstars and the like from working with the feedback dashboard in half a year as for admin work in more than 6 years), but what I find rather strange at the moment is the redundancy of what we are doing here, and what the teahouse does. If I go back on talk-pages feedback, usually I find them there with their invitation. Lectonar (talk) 09:39, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I enjoyed helping but I grew tired of responding to questions and rarely receiving answers. I strongly believe we need to change the FeedbackDashboard to address the concern of users who never visit again or respond. SwisterTwistertalk04:29, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The main reason I stopped helping out at the FeedbackDashboard is because I would rather spend time contributing to the mainspace of Wikipedia instead of getting judged for making 2000 user talk page edits. I would continue if my user talk edit count wasn't affected. -- Cheers, Riley Huntleytalk04:45, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's a really unfortunate outcome. Who/how did judge you for having many user talk edits? Would it help if you got some kind of stat about how many newbies you'd responded to? Thinking of, say RfA, it would be helpful to be able to show that user talk edits are large because you responded to hundreds or thousands of people who had questions. Steven Walling (WMF) • talk20:02, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
@Steven - Although several users may be pleased at the user for responding to several questions and concerns, there are several others that believe that such edits may be seen as socialising rather than focusing with editing Wikipedia. Several other users believe that users should be participating at article talk pages (disputes, BLP concerns, etc.). I speak this from experience at RfA. Furthermore, another user (User:Webclient101) told me that he was quitting FeedbackDashboard because he viewed it as repetitive, and with some thought, I have to agree. I appreciate the concept of FeedbackDashboard but answering and answering the same questions may call for an FAQ. Additionally, users would frequently ask vague questions such as "it wouldn't let me edit". SwisterTwistertalk01:15, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for reading my mind, Swister. I believe this project would be more successful [and helpful] to point the projects aim at only answering the questions of confused users, thus more time could be spent on troubled users and their questions to be answered faster. This would also save the time of Feedback responders. -- Cheers, Riley Huntleytalk01:40, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is there an easy way to contact an admin or flag a comment (like in article feedback) if the feedback is inappropriate or flagrantly abusive? I've encountered this often enough and have found no easy way to resolve it other than hope that an admin will see it. I, Jethrobotdrop me a line (note: not a bot!) 03:37, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm...I see another noticeboard coming up :). Anyway, on weekdays cou can contact me, from about 8am to 6pm European time, Cheers. Lectonar (talk) 06:25, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would just like to say as a new person to join wikipedia, I think this feedback page and mood page is a great idea. It allows me to speak not only with experienced wikipedians but to understand that new wikipedia editors are having the same problems along with enjoyment out of wikipedia as myself.
This is just a heads up to let you know that we have undeployed Moodbar and the Feedback Dashboard from the English Wikipedia. As an experiment, Moodbar was a fair success but we have come to the conclusion that it will require a fair chunk of development work (on the Feedback Dashboard side) to make it fully usable as a mechanism for new user engagement.
Additionally, we have new tools that we are planning to roll out and test that will operate in the same space and we want to avoid conflicts.
Out of curiosity, are the comments from editors archived anywhere, or is there a summary of lessons learned? -- Beland (talk) 05:43, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. At phab:T88954, there was a discussion about the simple/experimental state of the extension's code, and the amount of work required to get it into a useable condition (bugs to fix, and features that would be necessary to create), and other aspects (such as concerns over the design/prominence, and how much work Analytics would need to contribute). Per those details, the proposal to re-enable Moodbar at Enwiki has been declined (and work into properly defining the criteria & process for the "sunsetting" of software, is slowly ongoing), but with the intentions that a similar (but better) feature will eventually be part of the Flow extension, wherein it should be easier to triage and share the workload in more appropriate places (such as the talkpage of the page that the editor is looking at, which is not possible with Moodbar). Let me know if you have any questions; I'm not very familiar with this extension, but I'll attempt to find answers. Thanks. -Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 19:40, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think you may be over-interpreting that. I've heard of no plans to cancel Flow, or even to de-prioritize it from its current level. What Lila says in those comments is that the current version isn't good enough for most uses (which is something that I frequently tell Quiddity myself ;-) and that we may need multiple tools, including specialized tools, to do multiple jobs, including specialized jobs. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 21:03, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So yet again something mostly everyone here supports gets declined ... Yet Flow (which half of the community hates!) gets pushed forward anyway .... Flow will be the death of this place and everyone on this site knows it. –Davey2010Talk20:36, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair I did say "most", and as you'll see from the discussion I wasn't all that supporting of it neither but people did seem to want it on more than not although I completely understand there's bugs & what not .... It just seems IMHO the WMF care more about Flow than perhaps the minor of things but thats just IMHO. –Davey2010Talk23:43, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Quiddity, you do realize another big problem with making mood bar a part of flow, right? Even if everyone enthusiastically embraces flow and we deploy it everywhere, under your idea, the new mood bar would only work on talk pages. A lot of the frustration of editing is to articles, which, obviously, will never use flow. The vast majority of edits by new users would never have it. So, what we have here is another case of developers blatantly ignoring the community in favor of their pet projects. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 21:37, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Oiyarbepsy: The current Moodbar is just a link (shown on every single page of the wiki, including special:pages), which opens a modal window, which then places the feedback at a central page (dashboard) - there is no way to determine where an editor was, when they left a comment - try it at https://test.wikipedia.org . My comment was just meant to indicate that the same interface would/will be possible with Flow, but with the added option of being able to show the feedback on both the relevant talkpage (if available) and/or anywhere else such as WP:HELP or WP:RD, etc (including a centralized hub of everything, if so desired). Sorry that I didn't describe it clearly. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:24, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Quiddity (WMF): Dang. I am a little disappointed that Moodbar Feedback is being scrapped, because I think it's a really straightforward and quick way to engage with newer editors to congratulate them on early contributions or to address confusion. It was also easy to start helping others (i.e. you didn't need to be anyone special to respond to feedback). That something like it is being thought out for Flow is good to hear, however, and I sense the WMF recognizes that the concept has value. The comments you've listed make sense to me as to why the request was declined; I guess I thought it would simply be like turning on a switch, but it seems that isn't the case. If there are updates about putting something like this into Flow, it might be good to notify folks here. I, JethroBTdrop me a line22:02, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I was pinged, but I do not see how this concerns me. I am but one of many who oppose Flow. Tha's all. FWIW however, if the WMF are determined to go ahead with flow, they will quickly see that it will be the most effective way to reduce communication on-Wiki between established volunteeers. If that what the Foundation wants, so be it, but ohne mich. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:23, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict):::I see, Quiddity. Well I still stand by my comment that 0.3% is a percentage of nothing. On another note, I fully support Lukeno94's comment there, while Oiyarbepsy's arrogant, extremely juvenile and divisive attitude is something we can all do without on Wikipedia. Goodness, whatever is Wikipedia turning into? I'll be researching to see if such behaviour is worth discussion in a more prominent place. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:52, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I had forgotten the exact location of the discussion, so thanks for re-linking it. Although I also stand by my position, which was that it was not a helpful tool at all, the fact of the matter is that consensus was to turn it back on. Not to leave it disabled until Flow, which no one has ever asked for and seems to have an uncertain future at best, is heaped upon us like a sack of horse manure. Lukeno94(tell Luke off here)23:36, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Hydroxonium (T•C•V) 00:51, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
fredgandt 02:57, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Done Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 22:39, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Resolved