Thread:Talk:Article feedback/Gaming the system, is there a way to have both useful ratings and conversion of readers to editors?/reply (4)

This is the point in which you make such suggestions, I believe. Fabrice is (afaik) managing the project, with a lot of input from us at the WMF and the community. We really want this to be transparent in design, with input from the community, so opening a thread with your thoughts is probably good.

Personally, I'm not a fan so much of a whole "tab" devoted to the reviews. I'd prefer to have the reviews more tightly coupled with the tool itself. Currently, the tool has two modes: "Submit Rating" and "View Ratings"; I could see a third option for "Reviews" or "Suggestions for Improvement" (which is why I argued for a more 'tab' focused format in the current design. This did not manifest, however.).

I do not believe that there is any intention to integration with the current system of article assessment. Article assessment is done by people who are devoted to it or are (supposedly) subject-matter experts. This tool is aimed at readers.

What I'd personally like to see is something that could help to create a "work list". "Needs more photos." "Needs better copy." Etc. Ways in which the reader community can contribute easily. We know many readers have suggestions for improvement but honestly feel like they do not have the right to edit the page. So this can help to bridge that gap.

I think we need to make it clear that there is a difference between the article's "Assessment" and it's "Reader Opinion." Though I'm not entirely convinced (at this point) that there is any "correct" way to do this.

I totally encourage you to open new threads with suggestions for Fabrice. I don't know if you've met him; he's a great guy and totally open to good ideas and constructive discussion.