Reading/Multimedia/Media Viewer/Survey/nl

Om feedback van de gebruikers te krijgen over de Media Viewer, heeft de Wikimedia Foundation in de periode april - juli 2014 een globale enquête in meerdere talen gehouden. Deze nieuwe browser voor afbeeldingen is in die periode als release vrijgegeven in de hele wereld, dit volgens het release plan.

Het doel van de enquête was het zoeken naar problemen die leven in de gemeenschap en de tevredenheid te peilen over de Media Viewer. In het hulpmiddel hadden we met een opvallende knop de gebruikers gevraagd drie vragen te beantwoorden, een kleine pop-up enquête die in meerdere talen beschikbaar was.

Hier geven wij de belangrijkste resultaten aan, u kunt ook een rapport bekijken met de eerste resultaten en de uitleg over dit onderzoek.

Resultaten
Op 6 september 2015 zijn de resultaten geplaatst op daarvoor bestemde SurveyMonkey pagina, survey number SM-6N66NXL8, er is een sterke tegenstand voor Media Viewer. Op de vraag "Is deze Mediaviewer handig om afbeeldingen en informatie erover weer te geven?",


 * 53.96% zegt NEE
 * 10.17% zegt NIET ZEKER
 * 35.87% zegt JA

Dus heeft maar ongeveer 1/3 van de gebruikers een voorkeur voor Media Viewer.

Mijlpalen












Update 24 juli
Dit zijn de eindresultaten, de enquête is 18.199 keer ingevuld. Alle enquêtes zijn gesloten op 8 juli 2014:


 * Omdat dit een optionele enquête was, kan de mate van waardering niet gezien worden als een maatstaf om conclusies aan te verbinden, doordat je jezelf selecteert als invuller zal de enquête vaker door mensen die er problemen mee hebben worden ingevuld. Het doel van de enquête was niet om een beoordeling te krijgen maar om commentaar te krijgen om het hulpmiddel te verbeteren.
 * Daaraan denkend zien we toch dat de meerderheid van de globale respondenten het hulpmiddel bruikbaar vinden voor het bekijken van afbeeldingen (56% "bruikbaar", 35% "niet bruikbaar", 9% "twijfelt"), gebaseerd op de ongewogen resultaten, zie hiervoor dit spreadsheet
 * When weighted to match global Wikipedia readership for each language, fewer respondents found the tool "useful" than "not useful" (39% "useful", 50% "not useful", and 10% "not sure"). See this spreadsheet for raw survey figures, and discussion page for details on how the per-language results can be normalized to match global readership, for a different perspective on these approval ratings.
 * Cumulative "useful" approval ratings by language: English 36%, French 70%, Spanish 78%, Dutch 59%, Portuguese 81%, German 30%, Hungarian 63%, Catalan 71%
 * In the month following launch, daily "useful" rates gradually increased on the English Wikipedia -- and to a lesser degree, on the German Wikipedia.
 * On the English Wikipedia, we observed a daily "useful" increase from 23% to 47% between the June 4 launch and July 8, as shown in the graph to the right and on this dashboard. This is based on 6,415 daily responses ranging from 492 to 71 responses/day.
 * In the last two weeks from June 24 to July 8, more English users found Media Viewer useful for viewing images (50%) than not (39%), based on 1,291 responses for that period, as shown on the graph to the right and on this dashboard.
 * These findings suggest that users found Media Viewer more useful for viewing images over time, as they became more familiar with the tool, and as new features were developed based on user feedback.
 * We also observed different responses between readers and editors: on average, 62% of English readers found Media Viewer useful for viewing images, while 38% of English editors did not find it useful for viewing images, based on 1,090 responses during the survey's last 2 weeks, from June 24 to July 8, 2014 (see linked dashboards and thumbnails to the right).
 * Focusing on global reader responses, about 65% of readers found Media Viewer useful for viewing images, based on 7,582 readers responses in 7 languages, over a 12-week period, from 14 April to 7 July, 2014 (see linked spreadsheet and thumbnail to the right).
 * Reader "useful" ratings increased significantly over time for all languages, no matter where they started (e.g.: from 55% to 80% in the first 6 weeks on es, fr, hu, nl and pt).
 * All reader "useful" ratings are above 65% except for German respondents — even English readers end up at 67%, despite an initially negative response.
 * Note that surveys were discontinued once enough user feedback was collected to inform feature development.
 * Most surveys ended on June 29, 2014 -- except for English and German surveys, which ended on July 8, 2014.

See this spreadsheet summary and live dashboards below for more details.



Update 19 juni
As of June 19, 2014, we keep getting generally positive feedback worldwide, with these results:
 * A majority of global respondents find the tool useful for viewing images (56% response average, 60% across surveys)
 * Cumulative approval by language: English 29%, French 70%, Spanish 78%, Dutch 59%, Portuguese 81%, German 28%, Hungarian 62%, Catalan 71%
 * In the two week following launch, daily approval rates have gradually increased on both English and German Wikipedias. Approval rates have been growing steadily on the English Wikipedia.
 * We anticipate further approval increases on these sites, as more new features get rolled out in coming days, based on community feedback.

See this spreadsheet summary and live dashboards below for more details.

We would like to conduct a more detailed study focusing on the English and German results, and would welcome the help of an experienced volunteer to contribute to that study.



Update 12 juni
As of June 12, 2014, we continued to see favorable global feedback across most surveys, with these results:


 * A majority of global respondents find the tool useful for viewing images (56% response average, 60% across surveys)
 * approval breakdown by language: English 29%, French 71%, Spanish 78%, Dutch 60%, Portuguese 81%, Hungarian 63%, German 26%
 * approval rates have stabilized for all languages that have used the tool for over a month (all except English and German)
 * English and German approval rates are lower than other languages, as Media Viewer was only launched one week ago on their Wikipedia sites (approval rates are usually lower right after launch)
 * On the English Wikipedia, daily approval rates have increased from 23% a day after launch to 35% a week after launch (see data trends graph)
 * We anticipate further approval increases, as new features get rolled out in coming days, based on community feedback (for comparison purposes, see previous Hungarian increase from 42% to 63% in a month)

See this spreadsheet summary and live dashboards below for more details.



Update 27 mei
As of May 27, 2014, we continued to see favorable feedback across all surveys, with these topline results:


 * about 70% of 8,561 respondents find the tool useful for viewing images, based on an average across survey (72% response average)
 * approval rates kept growing from the previous week (Dutch and Hungarian approval grew by 1 point each)
 * approval breakdown by language: French 72%, Spanish 80%, Dutch 62%, Portuguese 83%, Hungarian 63%

See this spreadsheet summary and live dashboards below for more details. We plan to conduct a more detailed study in June, after the English and German deployments, and are looking for an experienced volunteer to help us with that study.



Update 21 mei
As of May 21, 2014, we continued to see favorable feedback across all surveys, with these topline results:


 * about 70% of 7,766 respondents find the tool useful for viewing images, on average
 * approval rates kept growing from the previous week (French approval grew by 2 points to 72%, Hungarian by 3 points up to 62%)
 * approval breakdown by language: French 72%, Spanish 80%, Dutch 61%, Portuguese 83%, Hungarian 62%



Update 5 mei
We conducted a special study on of first pilot responses as of May 5, 2014. Overall feedback was generally favorable, based on over 1,700 responses.

Here are some key findings:


 * On average, about 65% of survey respondents find Media Viewer useful for viewing images, across all languages. About 28% do not find it useful for viewing images, and 7% are not sure.
 * On average, 73% of readers find the tool useful for viewing images -- more than editors (66%) or active editors (49%).
 * The majority of survey respondents are readers (56%), but editors (30%) and active editors (14%) are well represented.
 * Approval rates have been increasing for all large surveys (e.g.: Hungarian approval started around 42%, and is now up to 57%).
 * More users found Media Viewer useful for viewing images on sites in English (72%) or French (71%) than on sites in Dutch (53%) or Hungarian (57%).

And here are some of the comments we heard often:


 * People who found the tool useful for viewing images liked the larger images, the modern look, the simple interface, the next/previous buttons, the info panel and more recently, the faster load times.
 * People who thought the tool was not useful for viewing images disliked the change in their interface, the lack of zoom, the slow image load, the image size, and having to look for info, Commons or exit buttons.



Verzoeken voor wijzigingen
We identified 32 change requests from about 414 comments across all languages.

Here are the most frequent requests:
 * Want zoom (21%)
 * Too slow (20%)
 * More image sizes (8%)
 * Want full screen or larger images (5%)
 * Can't find info (5%)
 * Can't find Commons link (4%)
 * Easy way to exit (4%)
 * More info above (4%)
 * Can't find download tool (3%)
 * More prominent caption (3%)
 * Want modal window (3%)
 * Images don't load (3%)

To learn how our team plans to address these requests, read the Next steps section of our full survey report.

For more detailed survey results, check out this spreadsheet.

Dashboards
Here are links to dashboards with live results for current surveys, as well as survey forms - and comments where available:


 * Catalan results dashboard | Comments | Survey form
 * Dutch results | Survey form
 * English results dashboard | Comments | Survey form
 * French results | Survey form
 * German results | Survey form
 * Hungarian results dashboard | Comments | Survey form
 * Portuguese results | Survey form
 * Spanish results | Survey form

Selected comments are included below, along with any resolution by the development team. To read all comments, click 'Show replies' in the second section of the live dashboard.

Commentaar

 * It's really pretty, but how do I edit the picture's associated page? (like file:picture.jpg?) (note: I extensively use a private MediaWiki install, but I seldom edit normal wikipedia).
 * Question number one - do not ask two question and then yes/no. Its useful for viewing yes, but for learning I dont know. Then I probably would like some zooming, and som bobbles to tell whats on the picture. I think it nice, but the letter f should give full screen. "home" and "end" should go to the first and last image respectly. It shouldnt say "use this file" when the file is non-free, and it should warn you if the image isnt free outside US, or outside United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. If I press the image it should go away again.
 * Go to https://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Llaunes_de_sopa_Campbell's Look at the second image (photo of Andy Warhol). Hover over "More details at Wikimedia Commons". Look at the size of the box and where the "pointer" is pointing. (I'm viewing on a 13" MacBook Air, probably 1440x900 resolution.
 * I had a problem with an image I updated in the Commons. The thumbnail reflected the change on the page where the image was used, but I had to realize to empty cache to refresh the image in the MediaViewer.
 * Not too bad, but usually I want to go directly to the file page, and this just gets in the way. I also find it strange that the license links to the file page (shouldn't it link to a statement of the license?) but the title isn't clickable (I'd link it directly to the file page).
 * I love that it has been created, but as with all similar browsers I am confused as to how to find the advanced tools.
 * It could be useful, but the images are blurry when they pop open and they never clear up. That's annoying. Also, it was really hard to get this survey to open up. I kept clicking on something that didn't really look clickable, and nothing happened, until finally this janky thing opened. The 'submit' button is barely visible, after I resized this window to almost full screen. I use Firefox on OS X (mavericks). I have ad blocker extension, if that makes a difference.
 * Preloading of pictures should happen.
 * Resolution: We plan to work with operations to pre-render thumbnails in coming weeks.
 * Every user needs to see description of the picture - without other action!
 * Resolution: We're passing on this recommendation to our designers. Hard to fit long descriptions in small space, though.
 * Make the transition low-res -> hi-res a bit faster.
 * Resolution: This issue could be addressed by pre-rendering thumbnails in background. See above.
 * The licensing (Public Domain, CC BY-SA 3.0, etc.) should link to a dedicated page describing the license and restrictions of it. The title of the image should link to the actual File page.
 * Resolution: #221 License links to Creative Commons in Media Viewer
 * Closing the viewer should bring you back to the place in the article you were at when clicking on it (currently returns you to top of article, on FF). And this window should be scrollable by default (had to full screen it to get to the submit button)
 * Resolution: #439 Page is scrolled back to top when the viewer is closed
 * What problem does this new approach solve?
 * What is the accessibility impact of it? Usability is poor, and these two are usually correlated.
 * Following on from the previous point, the thing is utterly undiscoverable. E.g., what does the double arrow icon do? Does it go full screen or does it show me the original size image? If the former, how do I get to the original image (which could then be shown full-screen following the browser's own mechanism).
 * If this is how our donations are being used, clearly the foundation is getting way too much money, or it's overstaffed.



Over deze enquête
The goal of this survey is to validate whether or not Media Viewer is useful for viewing images to its largest user group: readers. To date, we have mostly heard from power users: logged-in editors who took the time to enable Media Viewer as a Beta Feature in their preference and post on our discussion page. This power user group is not representative of the larger public we serve, so we want more feedback from all key stakeholders to make informed decisions about this tool.

A survey form is needed to gather this feedback because most readers are not willing to edit talk pages, which they find overwhelming and hard to use. We are using Survey Monkey for this project, because it provides a variety of tools for designing, collecting and analyzing feedback, as well as for sharing the results (see live survey results). We've used this tool for other projects like AFT, Echo and Flow, and it's very practical -- while we do not have free software tools that can provide a comparable level of service without additional development.

Inhoud
Here are the contents of this survey (see actual form). We will invite community champions to translate this survey into different languages, so we can get early feedback from readers before we are ready to deploy on English Wikipedia.

Below are the sections that require translating:

Knopinfo
Geef feedback over deze nieuwe kijkervaring

(Deze knopinfo verschijnt als de muis op de feedbackknop (in de vorm van een megafoon) wordt gehouden in Mediaviewer. Door op die knop te klikken, wordt onderstaande enquête geopend.)

Enquête
We willen graag jouw feedback over de 'Mediaviewer' die je nu gebruikt. Deze tool verbetert de manier waarop afbeeldingen op Wikipedia worden weergegeven. Wat vind jij van deze nieuwe kijkervaring?

1. Is deze Mediaviewer handig om afbeeldingen en informatie erover weer te geven?
 * Ja
 * Nee
 * Weet ik niet

2. Wat vind jij van deze nieuwe kijkervaring? Hoe kan ze worden verbeterd? [leeg tekstvak]

3. Hoe zou je jouw bijdrage aan Wikipedia omschrijven?
 * Ik bewerk nooit Wikipedia-pagina's
 * Ik heb een paar artikelen bewerkt
 * Ik bewerk vaak artikelen
 * Ik heb een paar afbeeldingen toegevoegd aan artikelen
 * Ik heb een paar afbeeldingen geüpload op Wikimedia-sites
 * Ik voeg vaak afbeeldingen toe en/of ik upload ze vaak
 * Ik heb afbeeldingen buiten Wikimedia-sites gebruikt (bijv. voor blogs of presentaties)


 * Door op 'Verzend' te klikken, ga je ermee akkoord dat je antwoorden conform deze voorwaarden kunnen worden gebruikt. Deze enquête wordt mede mogelijk gemaakt door Survey Monkey en op hun gebruik van je informatie is hun privacybeleid van toepassing.

[Verzend]

(De verzendknop leidt naar de 'bedank'-pagina als ze alles waar nodig hebben ingevuld. Zo niet, dan verschijnt onderstaande melding dat nog een antwoord nodig is.)



Antwoord nodig
Op deze vraag is een antwoord nodig.

(Vertoond als ze niet alles waar nodig hebben beantwoord.)



Bedankt
Hartelijk dank!

Bedankt voor je feedback! We stellen je opmerkingen erg op prijs. We zullen aankomende week Mediaviewer verbeteren op basis van jouw feedback en die van anderen.

Meer feedback?

Mogen we contact met je opnemen voor als we meer vragen over je kijkervaring hebben?

Zo ja, voeg alsjeblieft hieronder je e-mailadres toe (optioneel)

Je e-mailadres: [leeg tekstvak]

Met je e-mailadres wordt vertrouwelijk omgegaan, conform ons privacybeleid, en zal alleen door de Wikimedia Foundation worden gebruikt om met je te communiceren en je informatie over je feedback te sturen.

Hartelijk dank.

[Vorige] [Klaar]

Onjuiste indeling

Je antwoord is niet juist ingevoerd.

(deze foutmelding wordt alleen getoond als het e-mailadres niet juist is ingevoerd.)