User talk:Stephane Lo Presti/January-December 2015

Hi stephane

An expansion can only stand between us for so long. I know how miserable you are having to make posts about Overwolf app challenges and monitor Twitch streams while not having time to chat with the magnificent people on IRC. We miss you <3--Relyk ~ talk < 14:22, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Hey Relik, I shall print this post and stick it next to my desk as a reminder to come and give you some <3 Honestly, I'm quite busy and thanks a lot for the reminder! --Stephane Lo Presti talk 17:36, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

About the idea

Let me know what you think!

Here's my idea to make it easier for users to dump info without needing to know how to edit a page. We use javascript to add a big, obvious, non-threatening button at the top of every article that says "Leave Feedback" or something similar. The button just opens an editor for that article's talk page with the section=new parameter set, so it will be nice and organized and they can't accidentally overwrite anyone else's text. If it's possible to auto-populate the section title based on the user's name or IP (or something else unique) that would be good too. - Felix Omni 19:52, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Would this "Leave feedback" option be visible only for users not logged? Because users who have registered might find this big button a bit disturbing, other than that it's an awesome idea. :P – Valento ^msg 19:54, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure. I don't think there's any guarantee that registering an account means a person knows how to edit a talk page, but on the other hand there should be some way to opt out. - Felix Omni 21:02, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

That works. :D – Valento ^msg 21:06, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm all for helping new or temporary users handle the challenge that is editing a wiki. Sure it seems simple to frequent editors, but it can easily feel like a daunting and delicate task that puts off potential users with good intentions. If that can possibly be reduced to allow more people to participate in creating and editing the wiki's contents, I'm all for it, as this sounds like a good idea. —Ventriloquist 22:06, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Take advantage of forms and use a [[Form:Feedback]] form to add a Feedback section to the top of page? Forms do this by default and has two advantages: The normal practice of new discussion sections would continue to append to the bottom and users have immediate access to the the feedback section. We can put it in a collapsed table as you can view all the feedback normally through the form itself. You can use CSS to change the 'edit with form tab' site-wide according to Forms, don't know if you can restrict to namespace.--Relyk ~ talk < 04:01, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Alternatively we could use javascript to add a "feedback" tab to mainspace articles, pointing to the talk page, using an url similar to the following: Leave feedback. The disadvantage of this method is that people wouldn't be able to see other comments but hopefully we'd be able to respond to feedback such that the article wouldn't be a problem by the time a second feedback entry is left. -Chieftain Alex 10:36, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

What about having "leave feedback" just link to the talk page, without going into edit mode, then having a second button there "add your feedback" that goes to new-section edit? Heck, we could just rename the "discussion" tab for the first part ([[MediaWiki:Talk]]). That would allow people the chance to read existing comments before posting their own. —Dr Ishmael 12:13, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Let's not lose sight of the goal here: To make a simple, direct, obvious, zero-hurdles way for those who find the general wiki'ing process too complicated/confusing/intimidating to be able to infodump and run, essentially, without being taken to task for not doing it "properly". Simple. Direct. Obvious. Zero hurdles. Say those words to yourself a few times. - Tanetris (talk) 04:32, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Either that was excessively vague, or I'm being hopelessly dense. I don't understand how that applies to the prior suggestions - they seem simple and obvious to me. And the only possible hurdle would be if we required them to register an account, which hasn't been suggested by anyone. —Dr Ishmael 13:58, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Quick notes:

• I'd advise against the word "Feedback", in case it is taken to be closer to a forum. Perhaps I've looked at the GW1W for too long. Maybe "Is something missing?" Avoiding jargon may help.
• The more clicks a user has to do, the less likely they'll leave feedback.
• Have the form do an auto-"Show preview" in a non-threatening way, such as "Is this your suggestion? Press Save, and a community member will update the article soon."

G R E E N E R 19:16, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

@Ish: I was both specifically referring to your thoughts on an intermediate step of making them read what's already on the talk page, and mentioning as a general note/reminder. - Tanetris (talk) 21:58, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't see how the word "feedback" would be automatically associated with a forum. In fact I would think the opposite, since feedback is a one-way response. - Felix Omni 04:21, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Doesn't really matter what we call it. @Alex, I read discussion that we can have a javascript hook for the "Add new line" button and hide the other template calls. The thing with using the multiple function is they can edit their existing comment(s) too. Of course, we can model it so users add new entries and never have to go back and edit, like we normally do on talk pages. We can use the date as the subsection name instead of having a bunch of main level feedback sections, but not sure how that looks in a form or otherwise.--Relyk ~ talk < 06:40, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, I only meant someone might see "feedback" and start posting "OMG NERF THIS SKILL!!" etc. But then, that does happen anyways. G R E E N E R 07:32, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

An important note: once this idea is implemented, we want to message it broadly (directly on our social media but also on our livestreams and with content creators we're in touch with). So let me know if there's anything I can help with! --Stephane Lo Presti talk 00:45, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Stress the appreciation we have towards any and all editors; There is no need to create an account to edit the wiki. Also, I find very few people know about the /wiki shortcut. I myself didn't know you could "/wiki [Shift+Click]" an item until last month. If we tie more in-game players directly to the wiki, we'll absolutely get more editors. G R E E N E R 01:11, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

You gave me an idea: if we do this, I'll write a blog post that will be a great opportunity to highlight what you mentioned (and things like Overwolf's wiki app). --Stephane Lo Presti talk 16:55, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey everyone, I'm happy to see activity on this topic! It seems that the collective thoughts are on track to make this an easy feature. I'm wondering if it's worth looking into a MediaWiki extension for that? I know that Wikipedia had some kind of "Review/Leave feedback" feature that worked pretty well for them: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:ArticleFeedbackv5

In terms of naming this, we should be as specific as we can. Feedback seems ok but what about "Share info" or "Drop info"? I'll keep an eye on this discussion, so let me know if you have questions! --Stephane Lo Presti talk 17:46, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

In regards to Wikipedia, I actually like the term edit request which is used when a user cannot change a protected page or is too inexperienced/uncomfortable to make a change directly. They suggest proposing changes on the talk page before adding an edit request template, but I think we could just adopt the first part since their template is likely not simple enough. The actual link for users is titled "Submit an edit request". --Cali (talk) 20:13, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

I like the looks of the extension and it has the features we'd want (and a few we don't need). The main part is leaving the actual feedback and hiding comments that are vandalism. I read through the comments about the extension and the main reason editors dislike the extension was moderation and response. That doesn't seem to be a concern here. The other concern was about comments being useful. Because the tool is for players, most of our feedback will be way more useful than what wikipedia gets. I don't think we'd bother with the like/dislike, report abuse, activity, or feedback response apart from an editor adding a note that the information was added. As long as we have the expectation that the talk page is the place for actual discussing, the extension works for us.--Relyk ~ talk < 02:48, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't like that extension because the feedback is squirreled away under a (to new users) somewhat obtuse special page, rather than appearing directly on the article's talk page. It breaks the KISS rule even more than my suggestion did (which Tanetris criticized for requiring two clicks to reach the form). —Dr Ishmael 03:56, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm confused (I tried looking for information on the extension pages but to no avail): is this bad for the player or the wiki editors? Because if it's simple for the player submitting new info, but not ideal for editors, can we work with having a separate tab for that? --Stephane Lo Presti talk 16:55, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

wasn't one of the problems spam on the mw feedback extension pages making it hard to pin down actual feedback? -Chieftain Alex 17:25, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

It's probably not bad for non-editors leaving feedback, unless any of them ever wanted to see if someone had replied to their feedback - then it could be a bit confusing for them to figure out where to go to see that. But it's definitely a problem for editors - just read this.

However, there are other problems with the extension. The configuration only allows for enabling the feedback form on specific categories, and from what I can tell, it doesn't include subcategories, which means we'd potentially have a very long list of categories in the configuration. Beyond that, though, this implies that the form can only appear on pages that have categories. The most common case of this "info-dump" you're looking for will probably be for new "things" in the game that don't have wiki pages yet - and if they don't have a page at all, then they can't have a category, and this feedback extension does nothing. —Dr Ishmael 17:38, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Good points! I think this extension seems inappropriate for what we want to do, because of the way it's implemented. Is there a way we can modify it maybe? Or maybe go back to the form idea that was mentioned before? --Stephane Lo Presti talk 19:13, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

So guys, I don't want to rush things but this beta weekend would be a good time to try out one of the above ideas. If someone wanted to implement one of them tonight it would be a great test run. - Felix Omni 18:22, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

FML: Well this can't possibly go wrong. I'm going on holiday tomorrow morning so someone else can remove it if we find it breaks something horribly :D -Chieftain Alex 19:36, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

There will be more opportunities like this, so no need to rush this :) We should make sure it works properly and that the community is aware of it. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 21:48, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Trial by fiiiiiire - Felix Omni 06:37, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

On a related note, I wanted to do an info dump thread on Reddit a few days before stephane mentioned this because of all the threads popping up about profession changes. It would be fun to have a thread where people post all the content and information they couldn't find on the wiki (again). And we really try to avoid it being about complaints about what the wiki does right or wrong because those posts are really boring and go nowhere. Make stephane post it because everyone loves seeing the arenanet icons and get hyped on the thread.--Relyk ~ talk < 21:13, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't think it's a bad idea but here's how I'd do it: post on the forums and advertize this on our social medias. For those that don't want to share on our forums, point them to a page on the wiki, but which one? What do you think? I could also use this opportunity to mention the idea we're currently discussing here and gauge interest. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 16:51, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

I see what you mean, that makes more sense.--Relyk ~ talk < 02:54, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I see a "Leave article feedback" tab on article so I guess It has started? :) If the discussion is happening somewhere else, let me know so that I can be up-to-date on this, thank you! --Stephane Lo Presti talk 15:35, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Alex left a gift before he skipped town. I'm not sure if there's another discussion area. So far it's been use a couple of times that I've seen. G R E E N E R 16:30, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

That makes for a great prototype and test. I'd like to hear what the wiki community at large thinks about this, in particular if it works for everyone. Only when I've got the feeling that everyone likes it and it works (useful contribution), we'll be promoting it. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 18:16, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Need to fix it up to "Leave feedback (beta)" to imply a feature for people to try out? Change the tooltip and preload header to sound more formal. Also need to rewrite [[Guild Wars 2 Wiki:Feedback initiative]]. I like starting with this because it's basic wiki functionality. However, it's limited on basically preloading text and adds junk text/noise because of the preview. Could try mimicking with a form later.--Relyk ~ talk < 02:54, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

(Reset indent) So I've advertized this new feature on the forum as I said above: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/hot/New-wiki-feature-and-interaction-Leave-article-feedback-beta/first#post5302097 If someone could regularly take a look at this thread in case players update it with relevant information, it'd be great! Also, great job on updating [[Guild Wars 2 Wiki:Feedback initiative]] and I hope that this initiative brings more info and editors to the wiki! --Stephane Lo Presti talk 21:51, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Nice - thanks for doing that for us. Just an fyi, we didn't rewrite that page yet but I guess it doesn't matter... Current standard is adequate. -Chieftain Alex 23:04, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Btw, the leave article feedback tab is much more obvious when you use the vector skin... Perhaps we should consider changing the default skin for anonymous users (you once proposed this change ages ago, but it might be worth revisiting). -Chieftain Alex 23:09, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Agreed, I use vector by default, although I know it's not to everyone's taste (and breaks some stuff IIRC). --Stephane Lo Presti talk 23:19, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Wonderful, hopefully we'll see an edit spike over this coming week. Any particular reason you put it under the HoT section? G R E E N E R 23:29, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I put it there because that's where I think it'd be the most relevant with info about HoT being missing. Once we ramp up this project, I'll copy that to the General Discussion forum and will share on social media. If anyone has any other idea about it, let me know :) --Stephane Lo Presti talk 23:31, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

So we previously covered the vector topic @ User talk:Stephane Lo Presti/January-December 2013#Changing default skin (march 2013) + even older (april 2012).

• Some users didn't like the different grouping of the tabs (it pushes the edit button to the right a bit, moves the search bar to the top right, delete + move tabs are swept under the vector menu [I can see why tanetris would object to that but hey IPs don't get these anyway so you can select monobook as your own skin]).
  • true this moves the edit button further away from the article buttons, but it makes the "leave article feedback" button more prominent.
• Any references to broken code can be ignored - I've ironed out any vector bugs I've come across.

-Chieftain Alex 09:28, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for refreshing my memory Alex, do you think it's worth asking the community again about changing the default skin? Anyone should feel free to interject. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 16:09, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Is there any way to create a banner with a link to a vector form of the mainpage? Something along the lines of, "The wiki is planning a possible update to its default layout. Click here to see the new form, and let us know what you think." G R E E N E R 17:06, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

If we want to consider this option, then we could stick a link to vector/monobook in Mediawiki:Sitenotice. -Chieftain Alex 17:29, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

I like the idea of just using the SiteNotice to ask people to take a look at it and say whether they'd be unhappy to move to this. By the way, I realize now that the screenshot I posted on the forum thread is using the vector skin, so I'm going to have to show the default one so that people don't get confused. Changing the default skin of the wiki is probably a discussion that needs to happen above my talkpage, at an admin/bureaucrat level. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 18:35, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Progress on this project

(Reset indent) feedback for this feedback Idea, I think it would be great if this attached a feedback category so we could easily go to pages that have had feedback added to the discussion page, and then continue the conversation or add the feedback to the page.- Zesbeer 20:58, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

I imagine that this idea would make sense (?). I just came back from vacation and wanted to see if there's been some feedback about this feature. With BWE1 coming up this weekend, it'll be the perfect timing to promote that idea a bit more (on our social medias) if the wiki community is ready for it. Let me know what you all think! --Stephane Lo Presti talk 19:57, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

I've seen the feedback feature utilized at least a few times so far, to good effect, and certainly nobody's complained about it. I think we're ready to expose it to a larger audience. - Felix Omni 16:29, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Felix, we're going to give bigger coverage to this feature at the earliest opportunity (Wooden Potatoes said that he may mention it in one of his future videos :) ). --Stephane Lo Presti talk 16:41, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

One place where a large group of people would be invaluable is on the [[Level rewards/research]] page. The framework for each level reward has already been mapped out, but we're lacking on the profession specific rewards.

All a person needs to do is click on the feedback link, describe in words what weapon or armours they could have selected from at their level, and save the page. We can do the rest. What we can't do is quickly level all of the professions from 0 to 80. They can even take screen caps of the page, and upload them to imgur (which another contributor wonderfully did for us). G R E E N E R 09:05, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi Greener, first of all a huge thanks to you for being on top of this project, here and on the GW2 forum. I very much appreciate it and I'm totally going to make a call to the community about this, pushing it through all of our channels. I'm very busy at the moment but I'll try my best to give this a push. Thanks again :) --Stephane Lo Presti talk 18:40, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Time to remove the "beta" tag?

(Reset indent) If you all agree that the system is working, could we remove the mention of "beta" in the "Leave article feedback (beta)"? I'd also like to suggest that we make this tab title bold, so that it can be easily noticed. This is a period where a lot of people can contribute to the wiki via information sharing, so it may help.

This is somewhat related (and something I read on this thread, could we add a link on the left navbar to Help:Contents and put it in bold? Again, the idea is to capitalize on the "launch editors" and players willing to help. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 18:33, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Agreed on removing the beta tag

We actually already link to Help:Contents under the "Support" section - we've just called it "help center"... we could rename the link to Help:Contents if it makes it any more helpful. -Chieftain Alex 19:16, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Is the "how to help" needed beyong the "Help center"? I'm quickly looking at it and don't see why they couldn't be merged. Maybe by adding the sections "Common mistakes", "Finding something to help with" and "See also" at the end of the Help center? --Stephane Lo Presti talk 19:20, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Also the "Help center" could use some updating. "report a problem" could benefit from the "Leave article feedback" feature. This is a page that I can see promoting a lot, but it not being up-to-date could confuse would-be editors? Maybe I'll dedicate some time to editing it(?) --Stephane Lo Presti talk 19:23, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Also agree on the removal - I'd say the beta was very successful. —Ventriloquist 19:18, 3 November 2015 (UTC)