Difference between revisions of "Usability of Mediawiki as a collaborative workspace for knowledge creation"
From Testiwiki
m |
m (→Thoughts on scope) |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
===Discussion tools=== | ===Discussion tools=== | ||
| − | The [[Discussion]] tools should be included in the study. | + | * The [[Discussion]] tools should be included in the study. |
| + | |||
| + | ===Other=== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Wiki editing conflicts (multiple users editing a page) | ||
Revision as of 07:27, 28 June 2010
This page is a study.
The page identifier is Op_en4255 |
|---|
| Moderator:Tekerane (see all) |
|
Give your opinion to the peer rating of the content of this page. |
| Upload data
|
| Main message: |
|---|
| Question:
How do the various collaborative elements of Opasnet wiki support knowledge creation?
|
Contents
Tasks
- Refactor the current Peer rating extension. The new extension system should have two rating bars: scientific quality and usefulness.
Thoughts on scope
Possible issues with the rating system
- Do users know how to rate pages? How do they understand the scale of rating?
- Do users bother rating pages? Do users need to be encouraged to rate, do the users notice the rating tools?
- Usability: are the rating tools easy to use and clear?
- What are the benefits of the ratings to the author(s) of the page?
- What are the benefits of the ratings to other users?
Discussion tools
- The Discussion tools should be included in the study.
Other
- Wiki editing conflicts (multiple users editing a page)
