User talk:Ankit18gupta/Editwizard

Tremendous work

hi @Enterprisey, @Firefly, and @SD0001! I'm inspired by the the work you all are doing on the Editwizard and I wanted to drop by here to share why I feel this way and share the thoughts + questions what you're exploring brought to mind for me.

While I'd value hearing what you think about the questions I've posed, please know that I have no expectations for y'all to engage with the "Observations" I've listed. Unless, of course, something I've said brings a new thought/question to mind ^ _ ^

Oh, and for context, @Firefly and @SD0001 (@Enterprisey and I know each other ^ _ ^ ), I work as Product Manager on the Foundation's Editing Team. We build the Visual editor, DiscussionTools, and as you noted here, we will soon begin work on a way to offer people real-time feedback about the changes they're making, as they're making them. I'm arriving here by way of the conversation you all started at Village pump (proposals) a few weeks ago that @MMiller (WMF) drew my attention to.

Questions

• Can you share how the Editwizard knows/decides whether a source is "probably OK" or not? I ask this as the Editing Team is considering some way of offering people similar feedback about the reliability of a source as part of T265163.
• Is there a way to try out this experience on a mobile device? Visiting the URL of an article with the Edit Wizard parameter included on a mobile device doesn't seem to have an effect. Of course, there is something I could be doing that I'm not!

Observations

• I appreciate how explicit the workflow is
  • What y'all are doing – reads to me – like a step in the necessary direction of equipping people who are new with the know-how and tools they need to make changes that they feel proud of and projects find useful in the moments they are actually trying to make them.
• I appreciate how thoughtful the edit request handoff is.
  • Here, I'm referring to how the Edit Request the Editwizard outputs equips experienced volunteers with – what I understand to be – all of the information/context they need to decide: A) whether they will complete the edit request and B) how to complete the edit request. It also sounds like you can see a future wherein people could fulfill the edit request in one click, from the talk page itself...neat!
• I appreciate how little you have left to chance.
  • The above is inspired by the choice y'all made to prompt people to include a "Quote from your source that supports your fact" as a way to minimize the likelihood that people will request that unreliable information be added to the article, as you noted here and here.

PPelberg (WMF) (talk) 01:39, 1 September 2022 (UTC)