Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2011-03-14/Technology report

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


← Back to Technology report

Discuss this story

  • Maybe it's just me, but left-aligned edit links look unprofessional to me. Powers T 15:10, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Beware Hawthorne Effect: I realize it might sound good that more people used section-edit links when moved to the left, but they would look "weird" there, and hence more people will notice them to click, and if people know they are being observed then their performance often improves, as being on "their best behavior" (the Hawthorne Effect, when factory lighting was increased, or lowered, and productivity improved either way). Consequently, after people get accustomed to left-side "[edit]" then move edit-buttons back to the right-side and then more people will use them there: why? ...because they would again look different, more noticeable in the newer location. To challenge this, move edit-tabs to center, or even further right, and check the usage. Also, while we're experimenting, put a random do-nothing button saying "[click here]" in the middle of an article, and count how many do. Huh. Meanwhile, also compare to an occasional reminder that clicking each "[edit]" button will allow much faster editing of each section, and compare the effect of try-talking-to-me reminders, as well as shifting things around the page, to shock a user's attention. -Wikid77 16:28, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • The vast majority of Wikipedia readers (in excess of 99%) don't edit. (Compare the number of page views to the number of edits.) The fundamental question is whether moving the edit link to be next to the section title will encourage some of these non-editors to consider editing. So a good design for this test would include the following: (1) separate those who do click into two groups, based on IP address - those who are at an IP address where an edit has occurred in (say) the past year, and those who are not; and (2) count both clicks and edits, not just edits, because our horrible editing interface clearly dissuades a large percentage of potential editors (once they see it), but it's still noteworthy if a person takes the initiative to start an edit, even though they don't finish it. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 20:12, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I found the left-aligned link to be a distraction while reading, creating minor confusion about whether the word "edit" was supposed to be part of the header or not. Yes, I could eventually get used to it but - - why? The benefits don't seem to justify the disruption. Rossami (talk) 17:31, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Left-aligning the edit links would prevent them from bunching, a usability problem, which in my opinion is a good enough reason to make the switch. 155.99.231.77 (talk) 01:12, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Jarry is right, a feature should not be justified as a work-around to a bug (fixed or not).
  2. The assumption is that we want more people to edit. This is true, but it is not a blanket wish (for example there will doubtless be more vandalism too, which we would rather not have). So I hope the additional research covers the quality of the edits as well as the qunatity.

Rich Farmbrough, 17:45, 20 March 2011 (UTC).[reply]

  • Is there a way to revert this change via some LocalSettings.php or CSS settings? The left-aligned edit links are really distracting from the content and I find them not very nice to look at. Thanks, 194.246.123.103 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:33, 2 July 2011 (UTC). - PEBKAC. Fortunately, even with MW 1.17 the edit links appear to be aligned on the right side. Sorry for the noise :( -- 194.246.123.103 (talk) 18:55, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-03-14/Technology_report&oldid=1136671832"