Michael Snow wrote:
> On 6/9/2010 12:12 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
>
>> Michael Snow wrote:
>>
>>
>>> There have been a lot of red herrings brought up on all sides of that
>>> issue. Use of images in a context that is on-topic and educational is
>>> clearly one of those, although
phoebe ayers wrote:
>
> I adore the word "pellucid." But Gerard is right: simply put we can't
> and don't do everything. We don't make every piece of information
> available to every single person in the world -- yet.
I do admit that many actors in the wikimedia universe have
been forced to retrea
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 3:01 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
wrote:
> Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>> Hoi,
>> The WMF has as its strategy to invest in what has the highest impact. Given
>> limited resources that makes sense. It also means that while philosophically
>> as volunteers we do not have to make such
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/06/2010 12:01, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
> You are as always, as pellucid as a brick of coal, and totally
> off topic to boot. Please feel welcome to not post comments
> like that again.
The fact that you don't understand, don't agree with, o
Hoi,
Using words like "pellucid" I am afraid that the average Brit or Yank will
have to look up what you are trying to say, let alone most people for whom
English is a second or third language.
If you are not able / willing to understand what my message to you was, I am
happy to clear things up fo
On 6/9/2010 12:12 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
> Michael Snow wrote:
>
>> There have been a lot of red herrings brought up on all sides of that
>> issue. Use of images in a context that is on-topic and educational is
>> clearly one of those, although I would suggest that we can do better at
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> Hoi,
> The WMF has as its strategy to invest in what has the highest impact. Given
> limited resources that makes sense. It also means that while philosophically
> as volunteers we do not have to make such choices, the WMF will and does.
>
> It is obvious that depending on
Hoi,
The WMF has as its strategy to invest in what has the highest impact. Given
limited resources that makes sense. It also means that while philosophically
as volunteers we do not have to make such choices, the WMF will and does.
It is obvious that depending on your point of view, the choices ma
Michael Snow wrote:
> There have been a lot of red herrings brought up on all sides of that
> issue. Use of images in a context that is on-topic and educational is
> clearly one of those, although I would suggest that we can do better at
> supporting reader choice, because it's really the reader
Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> It would be perfectly fine if objections to the change stemmed from
> judgment, provided the judgment was sound. In some cases (not all),
> I don't think it was. I provided arguments for why I thought the
> result of my own judgment was better.
And that's fine (as I previo
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 3:15 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> Unfortunately, we're still
> able to speak about the community and the UX teams as distinct
> entities. This division will continue so long as the relationship is
> viewed in the context of "decision"/"feedback" rather than as a
> dialogue
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/06/2010 20:32, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Mark Williamson wrote:
>> Aryeh, I was under the (apparently mistaken?) impression that at
>> Wikipedia, the community makes the decisions
>
> Not exactly. If the community
On 7 June 2010 23:16, Howie Fung wrote:
>
>
> So in terms of a path forward, here is a proposal:
> 1. Immediate revert so that all languages are exposed by default.
> 2. We will continue work on a compromise solution. The current
> interface is probably not perfect, so we’ll be continuing to l
Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> Because evidence is a great thing, but judgment is necessary too. It
> would be nice if you could do everything strictly based on evidence,
> but real life isn't so simple.
Agreed. So why are you dismissing people's arguments on the basis
that they stem from such judgement
I agree that the User Experience Team and the community are still
learning how to most effectively work together to do product
development. Things aren't perfect, and it make take some time before
we get to a comfortable point. I think the best thing we can do is to
continue learning from eac
One major problem I have with this entire initiative, at least as I
understand it, is that data was only collected from en.wp and mostly
from native English speakers. Wikipedia is not monolingual, although
many of our users are... and it's important to remember that many of
these people are monolin
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Eugene Eric Kim wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 2:03 PM, wrote:
>>> Sorry for top-posting.
>>>
>>> Austin, think about who "everyone" is. The folks here on foundation-l are
>>> not representative of rea
On 7 June 2010 16:52, Eugene Eric Kim wrote:
> Good design isn't just about following the user path; it's also about
> guiding the users in a way that's appropriate to the mission of the
> work.
This appears to sum up the problem with this change: the usability
team focused on some ideal of usa
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Mark Williamson wrote:
> Aryeh, I was under the (apparently mistaken?) impression that at
> Wikipedia, the community makes the decisions
Not exactly. If the community actually made decisions, Wikipedia
would be a direct democracy, and it's not. The community doe
On 7 June 2010 14:55, Victor Vasiliev wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 5:42 AM, Michael Snow wrote:
>> If you don't know the history of racial issues in the US, you might not
>> realize just how serious a subject lynching is. In that cultural
>> context, it is not something to be joked about.
>
Maybe we should discuss if the usability is more important than
multilinguism (It's not!) in Wikimedia Projects.
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 2:10 AM, Elias Gabriel Amaral da Silva <
> If one wants to talk about usability, it's important to keep track the
> most impaired users, because they have more u
phoebe ayers wrote:
>
> Uh... much as I like Kat (and she's not the only female member,
> there's also Bishakha), singling out her view as representative of all
> women on the projects is, arguably, part of the problem. Are there so
> few women speaking up as part of the community discussion that t
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 2:03 PM, wrote:
>> Sorry for top-posting.
>>
>> Austin, think about who "everyone" is. The folks here on foundation-l are
>> not representative of readers. The job of the user experience team is to
>> try to bala
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 4:46 PM, Chad wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 10:30 AM, Birgitte SB wrote:
>> --- On Mon, 6/7/10, Victor Vasiliev wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 5:42 AM,
>>> Michael Snow
>>> wrote:
>>> > If you don't know the history of racial issues in the
>>> US, you might not
>>> >
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 9:03 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
wrote:
> Michael Snow wrote:
>>
>> Similarly, we know that the community population skews young and male.
>> That has important consequences, and some of those unfortunately
>> reinforce our lack of diversity. It's been pointed out what a
>> ma
asiliev wrote:
>
> > From: Victor Vasiliev
> > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] hiding interlanguage links by default is a
> Bad Idea, part 2
> > To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> > Date: Monday, June 7, 201
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 10:30 AM, Birgitte SB wrote:
>
>
> --- On Mon, 6/7/10, Victor Vasiliev wrote:
>
>> From: Victor Vasiliev
>> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] hiding interlanguage links by default is a Bad
>> Idea, part 2
>> To: "Wikimedia Foundati
--- On Mon, 6/7/10, Victor Vasiliev wrote:
> From: Victor Vasiliev
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] hiding interlanguage links by default is a Bad
> Idea, part 2
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> Date: Monday, June 7, 2010, 8:55 AM
> On Mon, Jun 7, 201
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 5:42 AM, Michael Snow wrote:
> If you don't know the history of racial issues in the US, you might not
> realize just how serious a subject lynching is. In that cultural
> context, it is not something to be joked about.
Your post is a brilliant example of agressive disrespe
Andrew Garrett wrote:
> I will say to be fair that the best response to what you perceive as a
> poor design choice in somebody else's code is not to revert them and
> say "There, I fixed it for you. Thank me later.", but perhaps to
> discuss it with them first and find a compromise. There's an
> i
Andrew Garrett writes:
> I will say to be fair that the best response to what you perceive as a
> poor design choice in somebody else's code is not to revert them and
> say "There, I fixed it for you. Thank me later.", but perhaps to
> discuss it with them first and find a compromise. There's an
>
--- On Mon, 7/6/10, Andrew Gray wrote:
> There is a piece of user js which was implemented on en
> which does
> this, incidentally:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Manishearth/Scripts#Wikipedia_interwiki_translator
>
> - it turns, eg, "Espanol" into "Spanish (t)", with the (t)
> link goin
On 7 June 2010 08:42, Ray Saintonge wrote:
> Given the availability of translations that are just a click away, not
> even a native English speaker has to fear that clicking on an interwiki
> link will produce an unintelligible page. There could even be value to a
> double list which gives the op
Andreas Kolbe wrote:
> I used the interwiki links all the time in this manner at work, and still do.
> It was one of the things that turned me on to Wikipedia and caused me to
> start contributing, and eventually to register an account.
>
> As others have said, if the interwiki links had not bee
On 6/6/2010 9:03 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
> Michael Snow wrote:
>
>> Similarly, we know that the community population skews young and male.
>> That has important consequences, and some of those unfortunately
>> reinforce our lack of diversity. It's been pointed out what a
>> male-centri
--- El dom 6-jun-10, Michael Snow escribió:
> > I always think I don't have the page in my watchlist!!!
> >
> > Now, that's a reason to complain (Lynch the usability team!)
> >
> I trust that at least the last part of this was meant as a
> joke, but I think it's worth a comment anyway.
Mi
2010/6/2 Aryeh Gregor :
> On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>> Who cares if people click them a lot? The space they formally
>> occupied is filled with nothing now.
>
> Interface clutter is not psychologically free. Empty space is better
> than space filled with mostly-usele
Michael Snow wrote:
>
> Similarly, we know that the community population skews young and male.
> That has important consequences, and some of those unfortunately
> reinforce our lack of diversity. It's been pointed out what a
> male-centric approach we sometimes have, in the enthusiasm and manne
On 6/6/2010 2:57 PM, Mariano Cecowski wrote:
> I can't believe that with all the complains no one has yet brought up the
> fact that the 'watch' has been replaced by a star that turns blue instead of
> yellow.
>
> I always think I don't have the page in my watchlist!!!
>
> Now, that's a reason to
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 6:23 AM, Roan Kattouw wrote:
> Chad writes:
>> I'd like to touch on this one particular point. The community HAS spoken
>> and clearly wants it back the way it was. A volunteer even did so [0] but
>> was reverted [1] with the message that UI changes to Vector are off-limits
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 5:40 PM, Victor Vasiliev wrote:
>
> Oh, and no wonder that IW links are used less in Vector than in
> Monobook. Monobook sidebar has clear division between blocks. Vector
> has some loosy line between them. Also, in Vector sidebar elements are
> on the grey background, so mo
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 12:22 PM, MZMcBride wrote:
>
> (...)
> The default should be flipped. There is near-universal agreement on this
> point at this point, including from Erik Moeller. I expect this will happen
> on Monday.
>
> And, for those curious, the article with 243 interlanguage links is
MZMcBride wrote:
> MZMcBride wrote:
>
>> As far as I'm aware, nobody has properly graphed interlanguage link
>> occurrence on the English Wikipedia. The data I found querying non-redirects
>> in the article namespace on the English Wikipedia is available here.[1] As
>> you can see, 1774000 artic
eam!)
MarianoC.-
--- El dom 6-jun-10, Victor Vasiliev escribió:
> De: Victor Vasiliev
> Asunto: Re: [Foundation-l] hiding interlanguage links by default is a Bad
> Idea, part 2
> Para: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> Fecha: domingo, 6 de junio de 2010, 17:4
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 1:07 AM, Erik Moeller wrote:
> The original intent of the UX team, as I understand it, was to help
> readers find essential (frequently clicked) elements in the navigation
> more easily by collapsing less essential ones.
This is wrong approach of reworking sidebar. To do it
MZMcBride wrote:
> As far as I'm aware, nobody has properly graphed interlanguage link
> occurrence on the English Wikipedia. The data I found querying non-redirects
> in the article namespace on the English Wikipedia is available here.[1] As
> you can see, 1774000 articles have 0 interlanguage lin
Chad writes:
> I'd like to touch on this one particular point. The community HAS spoken
> and clearly wants it back the way it was. A volunteer even did so [0] but
> was reverted [1] with the message that UI changes to Vector are off-limits
> without some sort of prior discussion and approval.
>
Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> [...]
> Data is important. It's also not always possible to gather. When
> multiple things are competing for attention, you can make one or the
> other more prominent, and it will get correspondingly more clicks.
> But it's up to your judgment to assess whether that's a go
Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> I should say that *almost no* users complain about small things. A
> tiny group of committed users will complain about small things, but
> they're not the targets of the Usability Initiative, so their
> complaints are not relevant here, *except* insofar as they provide
> rea
Regarding clutter and ease of finding the right language I believe it helps
a lot if the user realizes that the languages are listed in their native
form and are mostly in alphabetic order.
What often causes difficulty for me is the fact that the languages are often
in some strange order (e.g. orde
Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> My first guess would be that people didn't complain about interwiki
links'
> clutter because they've always been there. By the time you're
comfortable
> enough with the site to complain, you just won't notice
them. I'd guess that
> the complaints you see are when things *cha
rwiki links in en:WP than native speakers.
Andreas
--- On Sun, 6/6/10, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> From: Aryeh Gregor
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] hiding interlanguage links by default is a Bad
> Idea, part 2
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> Date: Sunday, 6 June,
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 11:14 AM, Mark Williamson wrote:
>> "change it back if people complain loudly". It means someone who
>> happens to be in charge of making the decision needs to make a
>> judgment call, based on all the evidence they have available.
>
> Aryeh, I was under the (apparently mis
> "change it back if people complain loudly". It means someone who
> happens to be in charge of making the decision needs to make a
> judgment call, based on all the evidence they have available.
Aryeh, I was under the (apparently mistaken?) impression that at
Wikipedia, the community makes the d
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 4:21 PM, David Levy wrote:
> At the English Wikipedia, this is not so. If we had a bike shed,
> there would be daily complaints about its color.
I should say that *almost no* users complain about small things. A
tiny group of committed users will complain about small thin
2010/6/6 Aryeh Gregor :
> On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>> There is a clear attitude from the foundation staff that I, and
>> others, are perceiving in these discussions. The notion that the
>> community of contributors is a particularly whiny batch of customers
>> who mu
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> There is a clear attitude from the foundation staff that I, and
> others, are perceiving in these discussions. The notion that the
> community of contributors is a particularly whiny batch of customers
> who must be 'managed', that they exp
Greg,
This makes two home runs in one month -- you get a prize.
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 2:03 PM, wrote:
>> Austin, think about who "everyone" is. The folks here on foundation-l are
>> not representative of readers.
>
> I think the peopl
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Samuel Klein wrote:
>
> Yes, this.
>
> The list of available languages is a key part of a page, not a
> navigation nicety.
>
> They used to be available at the top of an article by default, until
> that started taking up a few inches of screen space across the board
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 10:20 PM, John Vandenberg wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 5:48 AM, Aryeh Gregor
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>>> Who cares if people click them a lot? The space they formally
>>> occupied is filled with nothing now.
>>
>> Interface cl
nov
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] hiding interlanguage links by default is a Bad
> Idea, part 2
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> Date: Friday, 4 June, 2010, 9:27
> Me three for using the interwiki
> links as a way of finding the word or
> phrase I'm look
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> In this discussion we don't merely have personal preferences, we're
> arguing principles of design and hypothesizing benefit for the
> readers. And, excluding the foundation staff, we appear to have a
> broad, if not complete, consensus that
The foundation's programmers have the technical power to define the
experience of all aspects of the site however they please. They cannot
be prevented from having this power, but they nonetheless must not
use it, except for the most mundane details of day to day maintenance.
Their role is to car
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 10:00 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> In short, there is little reason for a sophisticated user to complain
> about this for their own benefit.
>
> I think the people here are speaking up for the sake of the readers,
> and for the sake of preserving the best of the existing des
The original intent of the UX team, as I understand it, was to help
readers find essential (frequently clicked) elements in the navigation
more easily by collapsing less essential ones.
It has been legitimately argued that the language links are essential
for many users, even if the click rate is
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> I was alarmed when I heard the click rates: 1%. That's an enormous
> number of clicks, considerably higher than I expected with the large
> number of things available for folks to click on. To hear that it
> went down considerably with Vector—well, if nothing else, it is
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 2:03 PM, wrote:
>> Sorry for top-posting.
>>
>> Austin, think about who "everyone" is. The folks here on foundation-l are
>> not representative of readers. The job of the user experience team is to
>> try to bala
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 2:03 PM, wrote:
> Sorry for top-posting.
>
> Austin, think about who "everyone" is. The folks here on foundation-l are
> not representative of readers. The job of the user experience team is to try
> to balance all readers' needs, which is not easy, and will sometimes i
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 13:19, Lodewijk wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> thank you for your summary, Guillaume. I would like to add to this a
> question based on Jon's insightful email:
>
> the research you did on clicks etc, was apparently only on the English
> Wikipedia. Would it be an option to first do mo
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 3:47 PM, David Levy wrote:
> Austin Hair wrote:
>
>> And yes, I'll echo others when I question the original rationale and
>> suggest that the interpretation of what very little data was collected
>> is completely wrong, but I think I'll direct my focus toward a
>> practical
Austin Hair wrote:
> And yes, I'll echo others when I question the original rationale and
> suggest that the interpretation of what very little data was collected
> is completely wrong, but I think I'll direct my focus toward a
> practical fix, rather than just calling the usability team stupid.
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 7:30 AM, David Levy wrote:
> Howie Fung wrote:
>> While we did not explicitly test for this during our usability studies
>> (e.g., it wasn't included as a major design question), we did exercise
>> judgement in identifying this as a problem, based partly on the applying
>> t
Hi all,
thank you for your summary, Guillaume. I would like to add to this a
question based on Jon's insightful email:
the research you did on clicks etc, was apparently only on the English
Wikipedia. Would it be an option to first do more research on how the links
are used on the other projects?
On 4 June 2010 21:21, David Levy wrote:
>> They especially don't complain about things like clutter, because the
>> negative effect that has is barely perceptible -- extra effort
>> required to find things.
>
> I've encountered many complaints about clutter at the English
> Wikipedia (pertaining
Thirded.
Waerth
>> Or you could simply restore the one-line code modification that
>> provided the default behavior requested by the community (pending
>> evidence that an alternative setup is beneficial).
>>
>
> Seconded. Just bring them back already. This is an imaginary problem
> you've c
On 5 June 2010 02:03, Howie Fung wrote:
> The Usability team discussed this issue at length this afternoon. We
> listened closely to the feedback and have come up with solution which we
> hope will work for everyone. It's not a perfect solution, but we think
> it's a reasonable compromise.
>
>
> Or you could simply restore the one-line code modification that
> provided the default behavior requested by the community (pending
> evidence that an alternative setup is beneficial).
Seconded. Just bring them back already. This is an imaginary problem
you've come up with here. The community is
[replying here and at
http://usability.wikimedia.org/wiki/Opinion_Language_Links]
Howie Fung wrote:
> First, some background on the problem we're addressing and the design
> principle that we used. Every situation is unique, but in the case of
> the interwikilinks, we believe the sheer number of
Howie,
Thanks for your detailed message. I appreciate your efforts of trying
to listen to the feedback from the community. However, even after
listening to the discussion in the office today, and after reading
your message, I still fail to understand the logic behind these
decisions. I'm going to
A minimalist design is a good goal to strive for. As many people do mot use
them, it may be a good cleanup of the interface. Howver, for its
afficionados the developers might create an option in the user preferences
to show all interwiki links directly instead of hiding them. Personally I
find them
On 5 June 2010 01:03, Howie Fung wrote:
> First, some background on the problem we're addressing and the design
> principle that we used. Every situation is unique, but in the case of
> the interwikilinks, we believe the sheer number of language links,
> especially within the context of an infor
The Usability team discussed this issue at length this afternoon. We
listened closely to the feedback and have come up with solution which we
hope will work for everyone. It's not a perfect solution, but we think
it's a reasonable compromise.
First, some background on the problem we're addres
Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> Now, mind you, I don't necessary support getting rid of the
> interlanguage links. I'm mostly objecting to the reasoning being
> brought forward for that point, which seems to be mostly:
>
> * Some unknown number of users might somehow end up at a wiki they
> don't understan
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> Hoi,
> This would be a good idea only when you are allowed to choose the languages
> you do want to see.
> Thanks,
> GerardM
The problem is, you don't have them configured the first time you visit
the wiki, which is when you are more likely to use them.
I am all for
Mariano Cecowski wrote:
> --- El jue 3-jun-10, phoebe ayers escribió:
>> That said, having the # of languages and/or a global
>> selector as
>> others have mentioned are both good ideas too and could be
>> a good
>> compromise.
>
> Can't we use a flag in a cookie to remember the choice of show/col
Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> Users don't explicitly complain about small things.
At the English Wikipedia, this is not so. If we had a bike shed,
there would be daily complaints about its color.
> They especially don't complain about things like clutter, because the
> negative effect that has is barel
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 9:39 PM, Aryeh Gregor
> wrote:
> Why would anyone link me to an article on ka.wikipedia? That's not a
> reasonable thing to imagine. I don't think I know anyone who speaks
> Georgian, and if I do, they wouldn't have any reason to link me to an
> article in Georgian. If t
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Aryeh Gregor
> wrote:
> In the absence of further data, the only real argument I saw for
> restoring the interlanguage links by default is to show how
> international Wikipedia is and raise awareness about how many other
> languages are supported. In this case the
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Mark Williamson wrote:
> Aryeh, imagine someone links you to an article on physics at
> ka.wikipedia.
Why would anyone link me to an article on ka.wikipedia? That's not a
reasonable thing to imagine. I don't think I know anyone who speaks
Georgian, and if I do, t
Wow, we get it. *No one* likes the hidden interwiki language link. Bottom
line, the only people who may be "annoyed"(though I doubt really any are,
and this was rather a decision to simply neaten the overall look of the en
site) by the long list of languages are the regular users! Those people who
On 4 June 2010 19:58, David Levy wrote:
> Perhaps a suitable compromise can be devised, but in the meantime, the
> only appropriate solution is to display the interwiki links by
> default. It's unfortunate that this fix was reverted, let alone in
> the name of "usability."
Indeed. Could someon
Mark Williamson wrote:
> That's not good enough. First of all, people who don't speak a
> language won't recognize the text "see other languages", or even
> "languages". Could you pick the word "ენები" out of a page full of
> text in a foreign language and understand that clicking it would lead
>
That's not good enough. First of all, people who don't speak a
language won't recognize the text "see other languages", or even
"languages". Could you pick the word "ენები" out of a page full of
text in a foreign language and understand that clicking it would lead
you to a link to the English versi
Aryeh, imagine someone links you to an article on physics at
ka.wikipedia. If there were a link that said "English", you'd know
what that meant, but if there's just a button that says "ენები"
(Georgian for "Languages"), how are you going to know to click that
rather than any of the other words on t
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 4:37 AM, Joan Goma wrote:
> Hiding interlanguage links will worse the effect of Google search on some
> small language projects.
It makes no difference to Google. The links are only hidden with
JavaScript, and Googlebot mostly doesn't use JavaScript, so it will
see them ju
Andrew Garrett wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 10:17 PM, David Gerard wrote:
>
>> Can someone from the Foundation confirm whether any testing was done
>> with people who would actually be affected by the decision to remove
>> the language links - or only on people who wouldn't care? If only the
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 3:07 PM, Andrew Garrett wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 10:17 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> > Can someone from the Foundation confirm whether any testing was done
> > with people who would actually be affected by the decision to remove
> > the language links - or only on people
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 10:17 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> Can someone from the Foundation confirm whether any testing was done
> with people who would actually be affected by the decision to remove
> the language links - or only on people who wouldn't care? If only the
> latter, then the stated reaso
On 4 June 2010 13:00, Austin Hair wrote:
> 2010/6/4 Jon Harald Søby :
>> When you are monolingual and are already on your
>> native language Wikipedia there isn't really a lot of use in going to
>> another language.
> What's more, when that language is the one with the largest Wikipedia,
> you'r
2010/6/4 Jon Harald Søby :
> When you are monolingual and are already on your
> native language Wikipedia there isn't really a lot of use in going to
> another language.
What's more, when that language is the one with the largest Wikipedia,
you're likely to find the most comprehensive article of a
1 - 100 of 144 matches
Mail list logo
