We should have a simple form that lets readers click a button on any MDC page to submit a bug against the article they're reading. The form should include space for their email address, a popup for choosing the type of problem being reported (typo, factual error, missing content, etc), and an edit box for typing in an explanation. This will help the wiki-shy contribute feedback to our documentation, and will get bugs filed into bugzilla where they belong. Ideally, there would be a way to see a list of bugs filed against a given wiki page as well.
so, use bmo rather than talk page with "simple form"? > Ideally, there would be a way to see a list of bugs filed against a given wiki > page as well. i agree with this, and i think we must have this feature when this bug accepted.. if each page has a reference pointer to their related bugs on the wiki (displaying) page, this scheme will work well, i think. but, if not, user will be confused between the bmo bugs and the talk page.
Yes. My vision would be to have each page have a button you can click to file a bug against it, as well as a button that would show you a list of the bugs already filed against it. My reasoning for setting this up is simple: lots of people don't want to edit a wiki, even to comment on a talk page. Providing a more traditional feedback form will encourage more feedback on our documentation. It will also help us track the progress of changes better to get documentation issues into bugzilla.
i agree with that we need the more "accecible" feedback site rather than talk page. but i don't think the bugzilla (bmo) is the best. at past, i think we had the same discussion as this about devmo (whose name wasn't MDC at that time, i think), and dria said that we should wait google soc result about "internationalizsed" forum-based feed back webtool imprementation. # at that time, all talk pages are thought to be changed into that webtool. how is the status of this now?
So it looks like there are two changes this bug is asking for: 1) Provide a way to submit feedback without requiring a wiki account. 2) Route such feedback to bmo. I have no issues with #1, but am a bit curious about #2. Earlier we encouraged people to use the wiki directly. Is this changing now? Are bmo bugs supposed to become the preferred way to leave feedback or just another one? Why have two places for the feedback? Are we going to get rid of wiki talk pages? I know bugzilla has better support for issue tracking, but having some feedback in the wiki and the feedback from the more lazy people in bugzilla doesn't really help with issue tracking. I think we should discuss the move to bugzilla separately, I have many questions about it.
(In reply to comment #0) > We should have a simple form that lets readers click a button on any MDC page > to submit a bug against the article they're reading. > > The form should include space for their email address, a popup for choosing the > type of problem being reported (typo, factual error, missing content, etc), and > an edit box for typing in an explanation. > > This will help the wiki-shy contribute feedback to our documentation, and will > get bugs filed into bugzilla where they belong. I like everything about this except the use of bugzilla. Why not have the form create an entry on the Talk page for them, and possibly add a template on the main page indicating that the page has feedback that needs attention? That seems like it would work best in terms of keeping changes and requests for additions in the same place, and avoid exposing the wiki-shy folks to bugzilla, which is at least 10 times less friendly than the wiki! I think we should also try to figure out why people are wiki-shy, and reduce some of those barriers (such as via inline/AJAX creation of accounts on the edit page, etc.) but that's a separate bug. I'm very much in favour of a streamlined feedback/correction system, though, especially if I can talk you off the bugzilla ledge. :)
We could also use a Feedback: namespace instead of the Talk: page, which would let us put the template everywhere and use the exists? tests in the parser functions to indicate that a page needed attention.
Thanks, Mike. Also, we'll probably have to set up a spam filter of some sort on this submission form. I like the "Abbreviated Turing Test" sqlite tracker uses - http://www.sqlite.org/cvstrac/captcha?nxp=/cvstrac/tktnew :)
Automatically closing all bugs that have not been updated in a while. Please reopen if this is still important to you and has not yet been corrected.