Knowledge (XXG):Petition to the WMF on handling of interface changes

1354:, why is consensus of primary concern to policy? Was there any consensus as to whether agile programming was considered to be desirable? Has there been any evidence that VE has assisted in drawing in new contributors who have demonstrated themselves to be potentially valuable? Has anyone had to clean up after botched markup was left behind due to one-off 'contributions' which were of no value?: I know I have. Were any special units assigned to various helpdesks in order to address VE-specific problems? A good visual editor may add value to Knowledge (XXG), but that begs the question of whether VE has been anything other than a disruptive, aesthetically detrimental nightmare. The articles look like crap screaming for anyone who's ever had an opinion about anything to contribute. I've actually surprised myself at how quickly I've gone from disliking VE to utterly loathing it. Oh, and to the WMF, don't patronise me by giving me the option of turning it off if I don't like it: I want to see how Knowledge (XXG) looks to anyone coming in. Sadly, pretending it doesn't exist isn't going to make it go away. -- 1384:

brunt of my comment surrounds questioning agile programming as a valid method of introducing a WYSIWYG editor. In fact, I've also questioned the concept of a WYSIWYG editor being a useful or desirable method of enticing quality contributors (quantity is something I haven't noticed a shortage of). Much as I'd like to discuss this at length with you, I'm in the midst of trying to sort out an article which has been blanked and vast tracts overwritten with badly translated, biased material sourced from one of the LOTE (Languages Other Than English) wikis by a new contributor using VE: approximately 6 or 7 lengthy entries which can't be 'undone'. Interestingly, this new 'contributor' has vandalized (and I don't use the term loosely) and blanked other pages over the last couple of days using VE. Sadly, this is not the first encounter I've had with VE edits on highly controversial pages. I think that might count towards answering your question, "what does this criticism even mean?" (

1770:, perform fairly rigorous A/B tests (of *each* iterative small improvement) with a broad spectrum of randomly-selected-via-usertalk-massmessage existing editors AND ALSO with quasi-randomly-selected-via-glam-or-similar beginners age 8 to 80 that have never edited wikipedia seriously, and then take those focus-group tests just as seriously as you take the pre-design mandates. Which Means Do Not Deploy Something Without First Getting Measureable And Measured Buy In From Real Editors AND Also From Real Beginners. Full stop, bye-bye, see you later, no cutting corners and no WMF fiat overriding the outcome of the buy-in process. Once you get a buy-in process that satisfies the vast majority of participants, then you will start to see serious benefits: good ideas float to the top, and get implemented, and are tested properly, and 2348:. That’s quite difficult and time consuming, and you have to know it also. At Wikidata, it isn’t possible in any way to change, add or delete interwikis without scripts. There’s just no way, except the revert button. oO So you have to add interwikis in other language articles or ask another person to change interwikis. Everything new invented seems to be based on scripts, and noone seems to think about accessibility. It seems to me that the foundation is only looking for new editors with new computers and new systems, everything which isn’t compatible seems to be irrelevant. I don’t see how there can ever be an expandation in wikis in non-Western languages without thinking about people which don’t have the last computer systems. The foundation should work together with WikiProjects like 2258:

communication mechanisms for Knowledge (XXG) - many of which are monitored by particular groups of editors but not others. I think adding a new place to announce things, while not a bad idea itself, will take a long time to get traction, since editors are set in their ways about where they look for information. Therefore, let's have make the standard policy of announcing the information to announce it on several places - on perhaps a new noticeboard, on the village pump, a notice in Signpost or the language equivalent, mailing lists, etc. Some people will likely complain about the repetition, but I think this is a price to pay until people adjust to having one particular location for announcements. Least that's my two cents.

1801:

waterfall-megaprojects are the WRONG way to run things. Start moving ALL the dev-discussions on-wiki (even if that means they are 'slower' because they are not f2f or proprietary skype or IRC or whatnot), because making 'faster' decisions that are THE WRONG decisions is counterproductive in the long run. As Gerard says, this proposal will end up with enWiki (and other major wikis) able to "block anything they don't like"... and that is fine, that is exactly the point, because once the community buy-in process is up and running, the devs will stop BUILDING stuff that the enWiki folks do not like! That is a feature, not a bug

41:

changes are by WMF employees or contractors, volunteer developers, established Wikipedians or some combination of these. There needs to be more exposure of what thinking has gone into different decisions, and (if applicable) what sort of evidence base is being used. Part of the problem is the wider editing community not having input into the process; some of it is the community simply not knowing why things are being done, which contributes to a feeling that a change is arbitrary. Some suggestions and examples of good and bad practice are included below.

2344:

work in Knowledge (XXG), but not for things like notifications and things like that. It should always be checked before putting things live in Wikis, if there ain’t no loss. It is no help at all, if there is a new JS script to show a notification bar that has disappeared just because of a new system based on scripts, that doesn’t make any sense at all. Also the new translation interface isn’t useable in any way without scripts, so it’s only possible to change translations by searching the right translation message with

1428:

consult the community before making major decisions that affect the editing environment and (2) its seeming inability to communicate promptly and clearly before taking certain actions based on those decisions. The problem has been a perennial one, and while there are certain steps that the vast and unwieldy community can take to make things better (this petition being one), the onus is on the Foundation to work actively to solve it; they have the resources and the organization to do so, or at least they should.

2376:. I suggest that there should be written something useful and helpful and that there should be feedback for new features before setting them for everyone as default which can’t even be changed to the previous working feature anymore, so that accessibility for everyone will be normal again in the future, ’cause now it isn’t anymore; every bigger new feature (like notifications, Wikidata, translation interface) isn’t accessible anymore for everyone. That’s not good and should be reverted in the future. -- 1272:

decisions to the community, without any sign of paying attention to the community's clear and repeated messages that the VE is not working properly in its present state, and that the current policies are making things worse, not better. dewiki: has also just said this loudly and clearly, with exactly the same set of reasoned complaints and constructive suggestions as found here on enwiki: it will be interesting to see what, if any, response the WMF makes to dewiki regarding it. --

2170:. This technique radically changes the way, formulas are rendered. As a result, formulas finally blend with text in a decent way. MathJax got thoroughly tested in beta. Then it was activated as an option for logged in users. Editors engaged in math, physics, chemistry or engineering got plenty of time to get themselves familiar with the tool and report bugs to the development team. Only after this step, which is more than a year now, global activation by default is considered.-- 2496:(that non-profit organisations don't have usable websites)... Newcomers to Facebook find it easy to use without training. People (including potentially very valuable contributors) to Knowledge (XXG) find it hard to use, even with training and documentation. There's no technological reason why it should be as hard to use as it is. Looking at sites that make a success of user involvement is a obvious thing to do. I agree with TheDJ that these arguments should be shot on sight. 934:

watched project pages. Frankly, keeping track of everything that is going on at Knowledge (XXG): space through the watchlist is difficult enough, to require users to keep looking for whatever arises at other sites, and then figuring out whether information found there is obsolete or have no watchers (a frequent experience at meta). I for one suggest below (comment #46) that WMF assigns a delegate that keeps track of up-to-date conversations and serves as an intermediary.

2417:

non-profit organization, it’s earning money with it and it doesn’t care a lot about privacy. So, if you want to be more like Facebook, then you are driving people away who wanted to take part in a non-profit and accessible kind of wiki thing. Otherwise, you are wiping away all the differences between a non-profit and a normal business company like Facebook. Then you can also activate advertising, if that’s the way it shall be in the future. --

216:

have to take part in English. And I’m very astonished that I don’t have a notification bar anymore, so that other users may be astonished that I don’t see new messages anymore now (or not at the time they are posted, when I’m here and contributing at that time, but at any other time when I look at the little blue number on top – not red!). Please give me the bar back, I don’t like it without notification bar! --

1779:

sociologically advancing and selling tech-upgrade-proposals. And I say this as somebody with the background, who understands very well that endusers will *always* resist change and they will *always* demand the impossible, but the 'solution' is not to wall the devs off from input, that is a recipe for a never-ending-story of disaster after disaster: notifications, watchlist-revamp,

2559:

with Communism was a lack of personal ownership in the system, viewed as demoralizing, and when users feel railroaded by changes then expect poor reception. It is not surprising that some people have implied the managers should be fired for the manner in which the WP software has been changed. However, Google tried similar weekly/monthly changes to their interfaces, even having the

2511:

encyclopedia has taken second place to the short-term goal of improving new editors experiences. A for-profit company could be expected to follow this approach, but it seems antithetical to the foundation's spirit. This is showing in the use cases supported by the new tools, that are insufficient to meet the community requirements, and for which no fallback is being provided.

349:

want to spend their spare time with debugging and writing bug reports; Interaction with the community has been improved: We got notifications about new features, we were asked for feedback; that's great! If more efforts would be put into involving people unable to contribute in English and asking the community about what is most wanted before developing something like

1508:) impossible to see? — those caught me by surprise and were soo difficult and timewasting to change for my own needs. Yes, for you guys, developers, I'm sure changing it to how you want it would be intuitive and not difficult, but you're programmers, you know, you're computer geeks, while I'm just an idiot. One way the communication needs to be better is to tell 1500:- Long standing never trumps change, and a better equality and a movement toward total neutrality on our beloved Knowledge (XXG) could make Knowledge (XXG) more encyclopedic. Also, I agree with WikiPuppies who said earlier up responses, "Communication between the community and the developers has been a one-way street recently, which is a recipe for disaster." 2753:

feedback on what our concerns are with it. Note: The WMF can't simply look over RfC comments for a list of stuff to change and presume it will be accepted. They would need a second RfC asking if we want it with changes X Y and Z. And I'm not assuming English dominance - I think it's a good idea for them to RfC on (at least) the largish communities.

1796:

sign, but needs to be exponentially ramped up: CONTINUOUS feedback, continuous iterative pre-design/prototype/betaTesting/deployment/re-design phases at multiple hierarchical levels, ALL projects/features/functionality and ALL proposals/changeOrders/bugfixes subject to the community-driven buy-in-processes, plenty of room for devs to be

2646:

mystery to me. Maybe this petition will motivate me to look deeper into it — but it should be clearer. Open collaboration over the software (not just of MediaWiki but of the specific EN Knowledge (XXG) build) is as important as collaboration over policies and guidelines of the wiki. I don't feel it is at present. --

2739:

1: Don't change the interface for active users. There is always a reason to keep functionality as it is--if not for you then at least for the editors. In most cases it is neither necessary nor advisable to completely discontinue a certain feature, and in all those cases there is no reason to force an

2558:

are moved, then expect major problems. In general, navigational controls should be kept stable. Perhaps the worst impact, of rampant changes, is when users fear how more "improvements" will be similarly disruptive. Plus, reminders about disruptive changes are disruptive. One of the dangers associated

2240:

Developer's Noticeboard, or WMF Noticeboard, is a must-have. The best part is that we can just plain deploy it on our own! Then we ask the WMF to post there. I would hope the WMF would post RfC's there, rather than merely Royal Announcements. Maybe we should put RfC somewhere in the name of the board

2075:

unfortunately undermined by (a) rushing to a decision, so that different ideas could not be adequately iterated (b) the decision to ignore the most popular option. But the discussion structure, including mockups and followup prototypes editors could test, was good, given the limited timeframe allowed

1795:

to onboard, are melded into a resilient and functional community which agrees on what the shared goals are and also agrees on what the next tiny baby-step incremental improvements will help. The model utilized by the community-tech-team, where they have ~~annual wishlist competitions, is a promising

1687:

I think the WMF would get a lot more support if they tried posting RfCs on this stuff. If the RfC supports something, and someone gets upset, the WMF can point to the RfC and people will respect that. That would eliminate a LOT of complaints and hostilities. If the RfC doesn't support something, then

1545:

You'd think after the Visual Editor & Flow car crash they'd ask the wider community first, Yet again MediaViewer gets enabled for everyone and yet again the community hate it ...., I appreciate there's going to be changes all the time but It seems the WMF time and time and time again don't listen

293:

Somewhere at WMF people are working hard on improving Knowledge (XXG) for new editors — a noble task! However during the last months I got the impression they're missing an important step: Checking back with the established community how these improvements could interfere with every days work and how

2669:

is assigned to the project to serve a public relations role between the community and development team, explaining the team's vision and motivation and channeling the most constructive feedback from the community back to the team. Developers have demonstrated their good will to assume this task, but

2343:

The default should be and remain that all or most of the users can have access to the new features and there ain’t no loss anymore. There should be access to basic features (like notifications) for all users also without scripts. Scripts should only be used for features that aren’t necessary for the

1765:

prototyping for TrustedTesters groups (see comment below) on all major wikis to kick the tires, invariantly focus on iterative improvement never on stair-step mind-wrenching changes, do NOT roll out projects that are fundamentally buggy just to meet arbitrary schedule-targets, if you SCREW UP and do

1652:

Imagine if article Talk pages worked just as well as Article Feedback Tool? Wouldn't that be wonderful? Seriously, though... I've seen flow in use on other projects and it's AWFUL. Now, let's say 70% of that is the natural human dislike of something new and familiar. OK. But the sad part is, Flow is

1271:

The WMF needs to put the community's well-being and opinions much higher up their list of priorities. The WMF's recent communication with the community regarding the Visual Editor has been dismissive and condescending, and -- as far as I can see -- focused entirely on communicating the WMF's policy

1101:

2604:

For example, an approach to development may be to use something like Google's "canary" approach: have a version of the site that that contains features expected to be rolled out. Any one can use it as an alternative to the "stable" version of the site (some users may prefer to use it all the time).

2314:

This has been discussed before and I think everyone would like this (users and devs), but it probably requires serious architectural changes in both software and infrastructure. We are a long way from being able to actually do this in terms of maturity of the system, and actually getting the system

2089:, which before the feature was implemented, had 130 recipients. To quote from that page, "The Wikimedia Foundation has a duty to include the community as much as possible during the feature development process and to respond to their suggestions." (followed by "Historically, this has not gone well") 1936:

I'd prefer dialogue between the WMF and the folk here rather than the hallowed "content creators" whining about every change they see as "too drastic" and citing it's broken when truth is the the main driving force is a sentiment of "this is so different I can't cope, change it all back". I've been

1881:

says that MediaWiki software developers, including both paid Wikimedia Foundation staff and volunteers, are not subject to the consensus of the community at the English-language Knowledge (XXG) and are free to operate however they deem necessary or appropriate, such as adding, removing, or changing

1724:

Agree and support. Bishonen uses the term "idiots". I've always thought of us as "ed-iots" ie "idiots that edit". Where I work is undergoing $ 5 million dollars worth of renovations. Did they ask the final "users" of those renovations for input and ideas before they started? No, they did not. There

1610:

Products which are not yet polished should remain in beta until the majority of the large bugs are fixed, and the set of 'large bugs' needs to be agreed upon by community and WMF. Also WMF and community should be able to agree upon phased rollout, or a 'we've released a new version of beta feature

1222:

Even if interface changes make an impact on the retention of new editors, it seems likely to me that the creation and maintenance of Knowledge (XXG)'s content will always follow the 80/20 rule. So why do developers seem determined to ignore the preferences, feedback, and advice of the core editors?

488:

I'm confused. You think programmers have broken something because servers are slow? We've got tens of thousands of editors; do you not think that, were the problem at the WMF end, anyone but you might have noticed? There are legitimate issues with WMF-community communication. "There's a bug and I'm

348:

There were plenty of great improvements in this area during the past year; please continue: It's good that after new software rollouts, your bug wrangler looks for issues at the local discussion forums. Bugzilla is not really suitable for potential users of VisualEditor and volunteers perhaps don't

40:

seeking the right for the community to block everything they don't like. This petition asks the WMF to try to improve communication between editors and those who design, develop and implement changes to the interface of the English Knowledge (XXG). This needs to happen irrespective of whether the

2202:

Making Visual Editor default despite considerable feedback during testing that it had major bugs and that the fact it did not accommodate important aspects of editing (references, infoboxes ...) was a problem. Failing to make it accommodate widely used browsers. Not informing editors how to revert

2019:

I think it would be better for the policy to just say they can't force new interfaces on us, like Google has just done with the new and "improved" compose interface. I don't oppose change, I just oppose change when it brings stuff that is not as good as what we had before. I am always happy to try

1978:

you don't see any paradox in the WMF developing VE in order to attract more & new contributors whilst not concerning themselves with those already here beavering away? You can't predict that many of those you are deriding may have already reached the end of their tether & are going to stop

1590:

After the disaster that is Media Viewer, I have no choice but to add my name to this petition. Both the Visual Editor and the Media Viewer do nothing but make contribution harder. They do not add anything but headaches. There needs to be a dialogue between editors and those who design software, so

421:

I am still plagued with a known bug with 'my notifications' that I do not suppose will ever get resolved. I was perfectly fine with the old notification or none, actually. I am not a baby and some of these tinker toys seem to be developed for use in the playpen. I had no opportunity to experience

215:

Ich hoffe, dass auch Diskussionen und Änderungsvorschläge in anderen Sprachen als Englisch stattfinden können und notwendige Übersetzungen stattfinden. – I hope to find proposes to changes also in other languages than English and that there can take place discussions where persons don’t absolutely

154:

We often tell (specially new users and our friends who don't edit Knowledge (XXG)) about our consensus procedure. how/why we depend on discussion-consnsus and not pole! Knowledge (XXG) should not be like other internet corporate giants where you have not other option than accepting the changes. In

1383:

I'm not certain as to what you're trying to achieve by making a personal attack on me, Martin. You seem to have plucked out a couple of points with which you've taken issue and presented them as being the brunt of my comment. In fact, if you care to read my comment properly, you may note that the

1267:

Every major change of the user interface should be done with the consultation of the community using RFCs. The current style of communication appears to be chaotic at best (see, for example, the conflicting responses to the important question whether we are allowed to continue to edit traditional

626:

Readers and editors should be made aware of the proposed changes in an easily discovered location (like with a banner message for big changes, or at least in Village Pump for smaller ones); discussion in some wiki-backwoods not meant for a large audience is inappropriate. The wording that strikes

2752:

The WMF would get a lot more support if they posted RfCs on stuff. If the RfC supports something, and someone gets upset, the WMF can point to the RfC and people will respect that. That would eliminate a LOT of complaints and hostilities. If the RfC doesn't support something, then they get good

1427:

The WMF and the community need each other, but instead of both groups utilizing each other's respective strengths to foster an atmosphere of cooperative amity and mutual respect, they are continually butting heads. To a large extent, this is attributable to (1) the Foundation's unwillingness to

1368:

This kind of over-the-top tone isn't helping your case. It's hardly "patronising" to give people a choice about editing Knowledge (XXG) in a way that's suitable for them, and what's suitable for new users is going to be different from what satisfies long-time users. "The articles look like crap

933:

Anything that is not on en.wikipedia is difficult to track and requires actively looking for it. I wouldn't know how to find such a logged meeting on meta except if another wikipedian linked to it from a talk page; and most editors will only follow talks which are accessible as changes at their

205:

Distant second choice, the first being the dismissal of WMF employees that repeatedly fail or completely disregard the need for community input. This has happened far too often, and even the Foundation have known there has been a problem for at least a year (I seem to remember a board report or

2645:

Provide clear user feedback channels to developers. Also, I'm a software developer, I'm an administrator, I've been contributing to Knowledge (XXG) for almost a decade, but how/where to contribute to the software development side of the project (apart from one or two comments on Bugzilla) is a

2529:

As an experienced computer scientist, I have noted how weekly user-interface changes are disruptive to editors, think "user-interfere" as a caution. The user-interface changes have virtually ruined editing of Knowledge (XXG) (over 2 years) for users with older browsers, such as the lockups and

2510:

There's a seed of truth in there, though. The WMF has made a major goal in and of itself to retain new editors and improve the user base. This is not a bad thing on itself, but the way it's being approached has an element of disrespect for existing users, as if the ultimate goal of building an

2257:

While I feel that WMF has been making a decent amount of good faith effort to improve communication, we definitely need a standard practice of where information is announced, both on a language-wiki level and on a global level. I think part of the issue is that there is such a large variety of

1778:

it at an ever-increasing pace as more and more folks learn that editing wikipedia can be fun. As opposed to, a constant nightmare combo of 1990s technology combined with rules-oriented bureaucracy ruled with an iron fist from afar by the devs who are insufficiently enmeshed in the process of

885:

I support improving communication between editors, designers, and developers regarding interface changes. As someone who is both a developer and a longtime community member I can see problems on both sides. For example, I think the Foundation is too reliant on off-wiki communication methods -

2416:

Don’t look at Facebook so much, not everyone here likes and uses Facebook, and perhaps you are driving users away from here that don’t like and use Facebook and now see the same (not even working) things here, too. Please find a better way of doing things than they do there. Facebook isn’t a

1002:

Quite a jarring change. A site notice isn't that much to ask for a major rollout. The fact that the next batch of technical changes (this time, with SUL) switching to one login page without actual notification is surprising, to say the least. Yes, it was announced on wikitech-l and posted on

904:

Are we supposed to somehow smell that off-wiki communication is happening? IMHO off-wiki communication should be banned. If there is no record available on-wiki then as far as we are concerned it never happened. The minutes/notes of all relevant in-person meetings must be posted on wiki.

2728:

Post-disaster communication 1: A standard good practice from the business world is, if there is a serious complaint coming in, resist the urge to immediately deny and dismiss it. Let it sit in your inbox for a day. Sleep over it, think about it, consult colleagues. Only then formulate a

2605:

The site can be used to get feedback on feature ahead of a full roll out — and if a feature doesn't work, or get's a back reaction, pull it (brutally and swiftly), then iterate on changes until a particular feature is well-like from whereupon it gets released to the "stable site" site.

1007:, but there's quite a number of users that don't pay attention to the mailing list or the Village Pump. I truly believe the foundation could have handled the rollout of these changes better, and I hope it's a lesson learned for Visual Editor's inevitable rollout for anonymous users. 16:

The handling of interface changes is an issue that comes up again and again. Fundamentally, there is, at times, a lack of sufficient communication, and a failure to try hard enough to leverage the collective knowledge of active Wikipedians. This applies most obviously to things which

1179:

Bigger changes in the user interface like VE or Flow should require a discussion or RFC before activation. And there should be a possibility for editors to use a simplified interface without active JavaScript - because of limited bandwidth, older machines/software, security reasons,

1800:

in taking a long series of small incremental-improvment baby-steps but NOT catering to reckless blow-it-up-and-rewrite-it schemes that toss backwards compatibility and UI stability in pursuit of a shiny silver bullet. Knowledge (XXG) is a complex wiki-culture-driven system, and

2315:

that far might be very disruptive in itself. It's not just flipping a switch or something. FB and Google's systems were designed for this, MediaWiki simply wasn't (actually it was designed to prevent fragmentation, since we were running on as little hardware as possible). —

1516:

that some helpful user creates on the fly, and that I need to find out about… and then, after us idiots have registered their frustration, imported the little scripts etc — then it finally becomes opt-in. Importing a script is no small thing for an idiot! Support!

2732:

Post-disaster communication 2: Try to think of the possibility that whoever turns up with a complaint might not be a troll, and, until proven otherwise, don't treat them as if they were. The community has identified and blocked many trolls, there are hardly any

674:

I sometimes get the impression that the WMF coders behave like school lunch cooks: "We have made cabbage stew, we DGAF that you want pizza, you will eat the cabbage or go hungry." The WMF needs to adjust their attitude towards volunteer Wikipedians, we are your

136:

I have no issue with the recent changes, but the community should at the very least know what changes are proposed so they can have an input into the discussions, and then they need to be notified that changes are planned so that they do not come as a surprise.

1611:

XYZ fixing issues A.B & C - click to enable this beta feature' banner. We need to find a solution, as leaving it in the hands of WMF product managers is not working, and does not appear to be likely to ever work with their current management team.

58:

I didn't have any problem with the recent changes, but this is an eminently reasonable request, entirely compatible with the collaborative spirit of Knowledge (XXG). As the petition says, it's not necessary that everyone vote on every new proposal, but

2746:

2: Accept that editors are as stubborn as they are, and preserve their archaic settings for them. If on one fine day I decide to turn up at Bavarian Wikiversity for my very first time, be so kind to copy my preferred settings from my main Wikimedia

503:

If all you can do is taking my post here and apparently from the linked page out of context for you own excuse you're part of the problem described in this petition. Solve the newly persisting problem or if you can't, please be quiet and don't post

1937:

long under the impression that a lot of old hands around here are very stuck in their ways to the point of being welded and would be prone to rejecting most if not every change if it didn't benefit them directly and they could turn it off quickly.

1595:. More and more, it seems that the powers that be would like to move Knowledge (XXG) into a frilly "trendy" mess. The simplistic style of Knowledge (XXG) is part of what makes it great. We don't need frills, and we don't need commercialisation. 2740:

editor to change. While we are stubborn, we are also exceptionally computer literate; Should it one day not work any longer we will find the proper checkbox in the preferences. And on that day we could not blame the Foundation, just ourselves.

518:

TMCk, I'm posting as a volunteer - but it's clear that you're not interested in an actual conversation on the subject. If you change your mind, I'll be on my talkpage as both a volunteer and a staffer and happily to discuss things with you.

2217:

Unclear or contradictory answers to questions about which advanced features the new tools will support (e.g. full support of wikitext at the source editor fallback in Flow), and whether advanced features in the old tools will still be

1576:'s script) (2) VE (which I don't use, and can't anyway on IE) (3) MediaViewer (which I disabled) (4) To be determined (given past occurrences, I would be totally unsurprised if this happened again). Waiting to see how Flow becomes... 958:

After the flawed forced deployment of the buggy visualeditor it is clear that the WMF needs to be reminded that they need to listen to us regarding issues that involve such major changes to the look and feel of the encyclopedia. Even

327:

there should be a possibility for people who do not have english as their first language to understand the project pages. If the community should help to make a project better, the relevant information has to be more understandable.

440:

Often I found out about these two days before implementation, with no oppurtunity to bug-test or anything. Things are getting more confusing, although probably overall a net positive to new users who have no experience with the old

2195:

after a huge backlash from the sudden disappearance of the orange bar, a new tiny orange bar was implemented without adequate discussion, that does not serve the purpose of the original bar, and disrupts the list of links at the

1175:

We, the editors, are the ones who make Knowledge (XXG) the best encyclopedia ever. We know collectively better than anyone else what we need to do this job most efficiently. Not listening to us is a disservice to the projects

609:

I'm was quite shocked at the recent sudden (and seemingly unannounced) changes to the UI and roll-out of new functionality. There's not enough communication. Greater access for the community to re-design discussion is needed.

278:

The communication between the Foundation and the projects ist disasterours. Even, as I can see here, the communication with en.WP doesn't fit, and other languages are obviously out of range and out of scope. That's very bad.

1951:

Your comment seems to me to highlight how important it is for all of us to get away from an us-against-them view of the issue. Not all content creators are whiners, and not all content creators are set in their ways. But

121:

I did not like many of the new changes but I also am glad the WMF is finally stepping up since we have shown we can't make any decisions. With that said, this is a much needed change to the way changes are deployed.

1503:

The bolding of watchlists, the Visual Editor, and recently the thing whatever it's called on Commons — you know, the thing that makes the useful information that I normally want from an image page (including its

1979:

contributing leaving even more old, redundant content cluttering cyberspace? Both developers & contributors need to work in tandem, not despite each other, for Knowledge (XXG) to remain a going concern. --

1116:

The trouble is that their job becomes the "phone firewall" version of customer service, as we're seeing with VE: they can't in fact do anything about the problems, but they're very sorry about them, repeat -

886:

listservs, IRC, Bugzilla, in-person meetings, etc. On the flip side, I think the community could have more influence on interface changes if they weren't so reluctant to participate in off-wiki discussions.

461:

The new notification system that was deployed with little to no regular user's input and little and/or limited testing, as could be seen by the bugs that were introduced with it, was just the latest and

1787:, MediaViewer, and the general and well-considered view the wikipedia projects are individually failures, DESPITE the site somehow managing to carry on broadly. Changing that perception, will require 2627:+1 to participatory design from the start and using samples for all kind of editors (including experienced editors from different wikiprojects), instead of limited tests centered only on new editors. 1688:

get good feedback on what our concerns are with it. Note: They can't simply look over RfC comments for a list of stuff to change and presume it will be accepted, they'd need a second RfC asking if we

2369: 1369:

screaming for anyone who's ever had an opinion about anything to contribute." - what does this criticism even mean? What change could be made to give a WYSIWYG editor and yet answer this criticism?

2673: 2034:

In practice, that would be difficult, because a single Wikimedia project, in this case the English language Knowledge (XXG), cannot unilaterally change the authority of Wikimedia developers. --

645:

Seems reasonable. I don't think the community should get to veto things, but it should be listened to before changes are started and certainly should be warned before they are implemented.

662:- unless there's a very strong reason for implementing a change (such as it being too confusing for newcomers), the community should have a right to veto it if a high percentage oppose it. 1591:

that the software that is designed makes sense from an editing standpoint. At present, this is clearly not happening. I'm very afraid now that I've learned about the abomination that is

919:

You think that staffers in the office should either (a) minute, and post these minutes, or (b) never have meetings? (Re IRC meetings, these are logged and posted transparently on meta).

1069:

of the problem. Therefore, the solutions they come up with will only support a small part of all the ways the wiki platform is being used by the community. For interfaces like the

2100:

is still up and running for editors that prefer the old way. This makes the requirements for the new tool much less demanding, and it's easier to meet the community expectations.

240:, otherwise there will be more problems with that also there (and not just here). Please check every of these new features with this page and let it translate into English. -- 2207: 155:

case you use Gmail, most probably you also disliked their new compose, but, you had no option there. Knowledge (XXG) should not follow this trend. The procure should be

2871: 1791:, and going to a system where the devs and the WMF non-devs and the 10-year-editors and the 1-year-editors and the extremely vast number of 1-day-editors that have the 853: 2192: 2069: 2725:: You have two sets of customers, readers who donate money to run your business, and writers who make sure there is something to read. Try to keep both groups happy. 1065:. Even when the Foundation makes significant efforts to understand the problem at hand, as is the case of new editor's experiences, their analysis only identifies a 1081:

that are meant to be the new gold standards for using Knowledge (XXG), changes shouldn't be made with a thorough understanding of how it will affect the community.

627:

most wise to me about this proposal is "leverage the collective knowledge of active Wikipedians". For what it's worth, I think the WMF ought to concentrate less on

2279:

and it works fine! Frankly, if I had been a trusted tester of Knowledge (XXG), I would have given an immediate negative response for sudden withdrawal of OBoD! --

573:

I have had some problem with the recent changes. I lost the "orange bar" functionality completely while I was working on DNS issues (now resolved), and it wasn't

559:

I didn't have any problems, but find this request to be reasonable. We're volunteer editors and that must count for something in the 'heads-up' notice department.

163:. Knowledge (XXG) generally follows it, but the petition itself shows there are few editors who are fully satisfied at this moment! (in addition see my suggestion 2096:

One thing that has made Page Curation work well is that it is proposed as a new tool that can be used in addition to the previous tool, not replacing it. The old

1318: 2550:), and perhaps others, until IE8 format (world's top browser) was fixed by early 2013. Most user-interface changes will be a net negative, as basically: if the 1766:

roll such a thing out then LISTEN WHEN GOOD FAITH EDITORS ARE TELLING YOU that such is the case, concentrate on software quality assurance and process buy-in

2373: 856:? It received unanimous support from the community, and the feature in question has long since been implemented on other Wikimedia projects. Why not here? 2211: 2811: 1844:, why should the community be forced to accept something that is contrary to consensus? Shouldn't the WMF want to take such a consensus into account? -- 1546:

to anyone!, We just like things the way they are, And any major changes should be discussed thoroughly with the wider community before implementation. –

1512:

the idiots, in a visible way, how to opt out of these things. Usually it turns out to be via something unlikely in my prefs, or for god's sake a little

233: 2594:). My impressions of it — and I may be wrong — is that it took a ivory tower approach to usability. Given the nature of Knowledge (XXG) more involving 1636:

The WMF rolls out too many unwanted changes. I will be very displeased if flow is rolled out without discussion (especially if there is no opt-out). --

796: 1692:

it with changes X Y and Z. And I'm not assuming English dominance - I think it's a good idea for them to RfC on (at least) the largish communities.

472:

I too wouldn't call for "firing of WMF personnel", although when (programming) geniuses are blowing up the barn, they need some serious supervision.

90: 412:

Almost every user-interface change caused some browsers to lockup, crawl, or garble the screen, for a day or for months. Overall net disaster. -

542: 509: 479: 2806: 2349: 2206:

Article feedback tool(s): not consulting with the community and turning the newer form back on without an announcement despite the result of

2850: 2801: 2653: 2614: 2235: 1669:

The way most of the major software implementations have been done as of late is unacceptable on the WMF's side. Something needs to change. —

963:

take the time to actually listen to their testers and delay releases as needed so there is really no excuse for the WMF to not do the same!

617: 257: 1802: 1337: 1238:

Yeah, anything that results in a rollout of stuff like the amazingly broken Visual Editor could merit a bit of additional consideration.

823: 1314: 2796: 538: 505: 475: 2563:

menu fade-in for 4 seconds one week, which gave the impression of S-L-O-W or low-power searching, while monthly rearrangements of

2722: 2647: 2608: 611: 197: 2762: 2699: 2685: 2657: 2636: 2618: 2576: 2520: 2505: 2477: 2454: 2428: 2409: 2387: 2363: 2332: 2309: 2288: 2267: 2250: 2180: 2161: 2139: 2109: 2043: 2029: 2012: 1988: 1965: 1946: 1925: 1899: 1872: 1853: 1835: 1810: 1756: 1742: 1719: 1701: 1682: 1662: 1647: 1631: 1617: 1605: 1585: 1567: 1540: 1525: 1491: 1479: 1456: 1437: 1422: 1397: 1378: 1363: 1341: 1323: 1298: 1281: 1264: 1250: 1233: 1217: 1203: 1189: 1172: 1158: 1145: 1126: 1111: 1090: 1057: 1028: 1016: 997: 986: 972: 943: 928: 914: 895: 879: 862: 847: 828: 813: 767: 755: 749: 737: 731: 717: 701: 688: 669: 654: 640: 621: 604: 584: 568: 546: 528: 513: 498: 483: 456: 435: 416: 407: 394: 386: 362: 343: 332: 320: 303: 288: 271: 251: 227: 210: 176: 146: 131: 116: 100: 72: 53: 2588: 2118:"If it aint broke, don't fix it" and make new features optional (opt-in) until many users become receptive, such as hiding the 451: 2887: 2567:

buttons became a bit of a joke until the interface was stabilized. Well, live and learn, and understand methods of failure. -

1417: 1406:

It appears I am a bit late to this party but I must agree with the intent. This petition needs a bit more exposure, I'd say.

2779: 1677: 1208:

Amazing that the group that keeps the largest community-built website does so poor a job communicating with its community.--

679:- we don't work for the WMF, the WMF works for us. If enough of us become unhappy enough the WMF will simply go belly-up. 589:

Communication between the community and the developers has been a one-way street recently, which is a recipe for disaster.

1866:

get to decide, not the developers. They shouldn't be allowed to enact massive changes without getting our approval first.

1305: 792: 777: 1956:

content creators, well, create content, and without content, there really would not be any reason for Knowledge (XXG). --

1706:

Agree with almost all of the above. Why is WMF above the consensus process? The fact that they are paid should make them

2833: 2003:". Either I missed something that is in the petition, or I think you read something into the petition that isn't there? 1917: 1904:

Or may be this would give the community a chance to provide feedback so that the ideas are improved before implemented.

1049: 373: 85: 2704: 2450: 2405: 2328: 127: 1885: 181:

Unfortunately, there is a lack of communication between the developers and the community that needs to be addressed.

810: 2791: 2086: 22: 1826:

become "seeking the right for the community to block everything they don't like", and I don't see how it can't -

2392:

Ah yes, I started that, if I have a couple weekends of free time, I really should start working on that again. —

1670: 1388:). One might be tempted to ask who VE is enabling/empowering and who is being disempowered by its deployment. -- 1074: 1921: 1806: 1497: 1333: 1053: 968: 788: 474:" I fully endorse this petition and hope something good comes out of it in regards to future software changes. 232:

PS: And please, don’t set this feature in other Wikis as it is now and as long as this isn’t compatible with

2501: 1471: 1374: 1073:, which are optional and targeted to a specific group of editors, this is not a problem. But for tools like 429: 353:(or was this just an expensive April fool?), I would be happy. I am also signing for Commons. Thank you. -- 81: 2199:

Dropping support for quick, stable browser skins, to force users into the latest user-interface experiment.

784: 631:

anyhow and more on the backlog of Mediawiki bugs and documenting and improving existing WMF-produced code.

185: 2860: 2470: 2275:: If Wikimedia want they can create a "Trusted testers" group who can give initial feedback! Google has a 2152:

and allowing Knowledge (XXG) editors to update it, according to their understanding of the project state.

1831: 1788: 1581: 1122: 924: 581: 237: 123: 1878: 1841: 1351: 834: 2263: 1984: 1942: 1884:

I have suggested what I think is more balanced language specifying when this does and does not apply at

1602: 1393: 1359: 1229: 1012: 992: 982: 875: 805: 636: 597: 2845: 2743: 2736: 2145: 60: 2681: 2632: 2599: 2595: 2584: 2516: 2489: 2157: 2105: 2039: 1961: 1849: 1613: 1433: 1294: 1260: 1199: 1107: 1102:

frankly they usually don't show aptitudes for that role nor should it be a requirement of their job.

1086: 1070: 939: 763: 745: 727: 666: 564: 560: 316: 193: 2670:

frankly they usually don't show aptitudes for that role nor should it be a requirement of their job.

2345: 2305: 2284: 2176: 1895: 1560: 1329: 1277: 1168: 964: 713: 524: 494: 447: 340: 299: 172: 142: 111: 2607:

This won't work with all possible features, but is suitable for many (particularly UI changes). --

2370:

Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Accessibility/What is accessibility?#How can we improve accessibility?

740:, you can see an example of what happens when communication does not work as well as it should. -- 2695: 2497: 2020:

new interfaces, but if I don't like the new ones I want to have the option to keep the old ones.

1536: 1522: 1462: 1412: 1370: 910: 818: 684: 424: 403: 391: 1531:

The recent launch of the "MediaViewer", in all its unhelpful glory, leads me to join this list.

258:

Knowledge (XXG):Village pump (technical)#Bolding on watchlist has gone away, please give it back

77:

Interface changes shouldn't be implemented without the community's being prepared for it first.

2572: 2460: 2422: 2381: 2357: 2135: 2025: 1827: 1752: 1734: 1715: 1577: 1213: 1118: 920: 891: 578: 413: 265: 245: 221: 26: 2149: 1797: 1780: 1592: 1078: 780:, feature development needs to be less top-down and based upon more upon what editors' want. 93: 2564: 2259: 2097: 1980: 1973: 1938: 1913: 1870: 1596: 1573: 1450: 1389: 1355: 1225: 1154: 1141: 1045: 1008: 978: 869: 860: 845: 697: 632: 591: 381: 358: 2854: 1004: 756:

Knowledge (XXG) talk:Flow/Archive 2#A note: board versus talk versus flow versus Cygnus X-1

577:

restored when I got it fixed. (I'll post on VP with appropriate detailed suggestions.) —

467: 2828: 2758: 2677: 2628: 2512: 2446: 2401: 2324: 2246: 2153: 2101: 2035: 2008: 1957: 1845: 1697: 1642: 1429: 1290: 1256: 1195: 1103: 1082: 935: 759: 741: 723: 663: 650: 312: 284: 189: 2203:

the change in default editing mode. Dismissive responses to reports of bugs and problems.

2122:

as an option. In general, avoid continually changing the interface, as beware moving the

1784: 2551: 2485: 2301: 2280: 2171: 2123: 1891: 1658: 1627: 1547: 1273: 1241: 1185: 1163: 520: 490: 443: 337: 295: 168: 138: 106: 30: 2085:? Page Curation was developed from March to September 2012. In March a newsletter was 2881: 2691: 2560: 2493: 2434: 1532: 1518: 1488: 1407: 906: 680: 399: 68: 2082: 2568: 2419: 2378: 2354: 2131: 2021: 1748: 1726: 1711: 1209: 887: 329: 262: 242: 218: 2874:- proposal for an elected body of users to liaise with the Foundation/developers 2555: 1905: 1867: 1653:

so horrible that even the 30% of dislike that's rational is still way too much.

1443: 1347: 1150: 1137: 1037: 1022: 857: 842: 693: 368: 354: 2865: 2754: 2438: 2393: 2316: 2276: 2242: 2072:- some options for restyling the new message indicator were clearly laid out. 2004: 1693: 1638: 960: 646: 422:

this modification prior to having it forced upon me (ie Facebook tactics...)

280: 207: 50: 2547: 2127: 1654: 1623: 1181: 1882:

software features, even if their actions are not endorsed by editors here.

1286: 2437:

of our software development feedback. Talk about actual problems please. —

206:

something which identifies this issue, but cannot find it at the moment).

2539: 1622:

What about the Article Feedback Tool? That was a big success, wasn't it?

1485: 311:. This is the crux of the communication problems and community backlash. 64: 852:

While we're on the subject, would any of the developers mind looking at

466:" screw-up. There is some other new problem that is discussed right now 2674:

meta:Research:VisualEditor's effect on newly registered editors/Results

2167: 1572:

For the following reasons: (1) Notifications (which I ignore thanks to

1862:

become. I don't want Knowledge (XXG) in the clutches of an oligarchy.

2374:

Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Accessibility/Introduction for developers

1999:", and as far as I can see the petition asks for nothing more than " 1886:

Knowledge (XXG) talk:Consensus#Decisions by WMF software developers

1840:

At least in cases where the view of the community is truly a valid

2823: 2236:

Knowledge (XXG):Village_pump_(proposals)#Developer.27s_Noticeboard

2130:(navigational controls) as disruptive and demoralizing to users. - 2872:

Knowledge (XXG):Village pump (proposals)/Archive 104#User Council

2484:

There's a lot of logical fallacies in that one paragraph, there:

1268:

wikitext after the full deployment of the VisualEditor and Flow).

722:

Communication is a good thing, and we're all in this together. --

991:

Absolutely, read my user page for my thoughts on the matter..♦

841:

a democracy. The community runs this site, not the developers.

704:

I edited the petition. Grammar and punctuation. Respectfully,

489:

on a speedy internet connection so: blame developers!" is not.

2543: 2535: 2531: 1385: 2665:

I'll add a request that, for all major interface changes, a

1995:

Could you clarify what you're objecting to? You said you'd "

1097:

I'll add a request that, for all major interface changes, a

2715:

tested, by paid personnel if necessary. Come as close to a

2241:

to guide them in the right direction. WMF RfC Noticeboard?

1725:

should always be a dialogue between user and architect.

738:

Knowledge (XXG) talk:Flow/Archive 1#"Board" versus "Talk"

1289:

and this will stay this way for an indefinite period. --

470:

at the technical village pump. As I stated over there: "

2297: 534: 2602:) would seem to be both more appropriate and possible. 1858:@David — Good, because that's exactly what I think it 2208:

Knowledge (XXG):Requests for comment/Article feedback

2868:- science for user-interface designs and workability 2592: 105:

I'm not sure why people aren't notified in advance.

2812:

de:Knowledge (XXG):BIENE/Technische Einschränkungen

2193:

Knowledge (XXG):Notifications/New message indicator

2070:

Knowledge (XXG):Notifications/New message indicator

758:, a corresponding example of how to do it right! -- 234:

de:Knowledge (XXG):BIENE/Technische Einschränkungen

1287:de-wp has been configured back to the opt-in model 2587:techniques are needed. I was disappointed by the 1997:prefer dialogue between the WMF and the folk here 2058:Please feel free to expand these sections below 2212:Knowledge (XXG):How to fix cut-and-paste moves 2676:makes for absolutely jaw-dropping reading. -- 33:which have been a problem for over 10 years. 8: 2001:asks the WMF to try to improve communication 1924:) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 1056:) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 256:Next change back to where we were before: 2807:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Accessibility 2350:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Accessibility 2851:Knowledge (XXG):Village pump (technical) 2802:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject User scripts 2144:Publishing and prominently linking to a 25:), but also to things which don't (like 2591:and notice that it has been shut down ( 2229:Please feel free to expand this section 1036:Changes should require at least a RfC. 537:at the village pump where this started. 2663:(Copied from my support comment above) 1710:answerable to the majority, not less. 2797:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Usability 977:Support, but does not go far enough. 7: 2589:Knowledge (XXG) Usability Initiative 63:can apply to the backend as well. -- 2583:Clearer user feedback channels and 2352:and others to avoid such things. -- 1822:Whatever the intention, this will 14: 2834:m:Limits to configuration changes 2780:Knowledge (XXG):Interface changes 2723:Customer relationship management 2690:My 10 cents for improvements: -- 854:my proposal from two months back 164: 29:) or to fix the typical 2-reply 2459:Nice point, that's a keeper! — 2214:, which is not even an article. 2530:garbled scrolling format with 2044:21:16, 16 September 2013 (UTC) 2030:13:14, 16 September 2013 (UTC) 1774:the community of editors, and 1: 2792:Knowledge (XXG):User Advocacy 2763:06:25, 7 September 2014 (UTC) 2251:06:32, 7 September 2014 (UTC) 2013:06:20, 7 September 2014 (UTC) 1757:21:44, 27 December 2016 (UTC) 1743:14:18, 22 December 2015 (UTC) 1702:06:09, 7 September 2014 (UTC) 1683:06:18, 6 September 2014 (UTC) 1423:02:36, 16 December 2013 (UTC) 1328:Why is this even a question? 1480:22:25, 1 February 2014 (UTC) 1457:01:40, 1 February 2014 (UTC) 1438:22:44, 31 January 2014 (UTC) 157:Inform → Discuss → Implement 2705:Software release life cycle 2700:20:29, 28 August 2014 (UTC) 1989:01:27, 29 August 2013 (UTC) 1811:20:11, 2 January 2017 (UTC) 1720:22:05, 8 October 2014 (UTC) 1398:00:37, 30 August 2013 (UTC) 1379:20:50, 29 August 2013 (UTC) 1364:01:08, 29 August 2013 (UTC) 776:As I mentioned in a recent 2904: 2846:Signpost Technology Report 2298:Response from Okeyes (WMF) 1970:Precisely so, Tryptofish. 1492:16:56, 27 April 2014 (UTC) 1021:Support, as a first step. 835:Contrary to popular belief 2888:Knowledge (XXG) proposals 2686:17:44, 23 July 2013 (UTC) 2637:12:05, 18 July 2013 (UTC) 2521:11:59, 18 July 2013 (UTC) 2181:01:00, 22 July 2013 (UTC) 2162:11:44, 18 July 2013 (UTC) 2110:10:58, 20 July 2013 (UTC) 1966:23:23, 29 July 2013 (UTC) 1947:17:19, 29 July 2013 (UTC) 1926:09:40, 14 July 2013 (UTC) 1900:00:28, 10 July 2013 (UTC) 1663:00:39, 21 July 2014 (UTC) 1648:22:13, 20 July 2014 (UTC) 1632:03:34, 18 July 2014 (UTC) 1618:08:03, 17 July 2014 (UTC) 1606:20:13, 16 July 2014 (UTC) 1586:05:58, 13 July 2014 (UTC) 1568:07:21, 24 June 2014 (UTC) 1541:06:54, 24 June 2014 (UTC) 1526:17:14, 12 June 2014 (UTC) 1342:23:04, 29 July 2013 (UTC) 1324:19:35, 29 July 2013 (UTC) 1299:17:16, 29 July 2013 (UTC) 1282:12:02, 29 July 2013 (UTC) 1265:09:55, 29 July 2013 (UTC) 1251:20:11, 24 July 2013 (UTC) 1234:01:59, 24 July 2013 (UTC) 1218:22:51, 23 July 2013 (UTC) 1204:14:24, 22 July 2013 (UTC) 1190:13:31, 22 July 2013 (UTC) 1173:00:44, 22 July 2013 (UTC) 1159:23:27, 20 July 2013 (UTC) 1146:15:07, 20 July 2013 (UTC) 1127:12:58, 18 July 2013 (UTC) 1112:11:28, 18 July 2013 (UTC) 1091:11:21, 18 July 2013 (UTC) 1058:09:38, 14 July 2013 (UTC) 1029:04:09, 13 July 2013 (UTC) 1017:03:46, 12 July 2013 (UTC) 944:11:35, 18 July 2013 (UTC) 929:13:09, 10 July 2013 (UTC) 915:08:49, 10 July 2013 (UTC) 768:21:36, 10 July 2013 (UTC) 732:14:11, 22 June 2013 (UTC) 718:14:08, 20 June 2013 (UTC) 702:06:30, 19 June 2013 (UTC) 689:09:34, 14 June 2013 (UTC) 670:08:52, 12 June 2013 (UTC) 321:12:12, 18 July 2013 (UTC) 294:this could be avoided. -- 272:22:18, 13 June 2013 (UTC) 2658:17:37, 2 June 2013 (UTC) 2619:17:29, 2 June 2013 (UTC) 2577:15:05, 26 May 2013 (UTC) 2506:15:27, 1 June 2013 (UTC) 2478:11:19, 31 May 2013 (UTC) 2455:08:24, 31 May 2013 (UTC) 2429:11:08, 19 May 2013 (UTC) 2410:08:29, 31 May 2013 (UTC) 2388:11:08, 19 May 2013 (UTC) 2364:17:31, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 2333:08:28, 31 May 2013 (UTC) 2310:20:57, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2289:23:00, 13 May 2013 (UTC) 2268:04:53, 13 May 2013 (UTC) 2140:15:05, 26 May 2013 (UTC) 2120:orange new-messages bar 1873:19:06, 7 July 2013 (UTC) 1854:23:32, 2 July 2013 (UTC) 1836:23:18, 2 July 2013 (UTC) 1498:user talk:Carriearchdale 1350:, if Knowledge (XXG) is 998:14:07, 9 July 2013 (UTC) 987:15:22, 8 July 2013 (UTC) 973:23:56, 7 July 2013 (UTC) 896:08:58, 7 July 2013 (UTC) 880:03:36, 7 July 2013 (UTC) 863:18:49, 6 July 2013 (UTC) 848:18:36, 6 July 2013 (UTC) 829:18:25, 6 July 2013 (UTC) 814:17:43, 6 July 2013 (UTC) 778:essay to Sj over at Meta 750:00:20, 2 July 2013 (UTC) 655:01:59, 8 June 2013 (UTC) 641:16:16, 3 June 2013 (UTC) 622:17:18, 2 June 2013 (UTC) 605:17:07, 2 June 2013 (UTC) 585:20:39, 1 June 2013 (UTC) 569:05:28, 1 June 2013 (UTC) 547:22:31, 1 June 2013 (UTC) 529:12:44, 1 June 2013 (UTC) 514:05:36, 1 June 2013 (UTC) 499:04:07, 1 June 2013 (UTC) 484:00:05, 1 June 2013 (UTC) 457:15:55, 31 May 2013 (UTC) 436:14:49, 30 May 2013 (UTC) 417:15:05, 26 May 2013 (UTC) 408:03:45, 23 May 2013 (UTC) 395:03:31, 20 May 2013 (UTC) 387:11:13, 19 May 2013 (UTC) 363:22:13, 18 May 2013 (UTC) 344:01:21, 17 May 2013 (UTC) 333:17:25, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 304:16:19, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 289:16:08, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 252:21:08, 18 May 2013 (UTC) 228:15:50, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 211:07:42, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 177:22:55, 13 May 2013 (UTC) 147:13:42, 13 May 2013 (UTC) 132:20:47, 12 May 2013 (UTC) 117:18:24, 12 May 2013 (UTC) 101:20:06, 11 May 2013 (UTC) 73:17:54, 11 May 2013 (UTC) 2368:There is a red link at 2277:trusted testers program 1789:altering the experiment 799:) 16:46, June 22, 2013‎ 54:15:58, 9 May 2013 (UTC) 2861:Unobtrusive JavaScript 2774:Essays on this subject 1768:as the main priorities 1346:VE is RUBBISH! As per 238:Unobtrusive JavaScript 21:get implemented (like 2433:This argument is the 2210:. This is present on 1761:Pre-design feedback, 27:cross-wiki watchlists 2786:Related WikiProjects 2667:Community ambassador 2600:participatory design 2598:techniques (such as 2596:user-centered design 2585:participatory design 2490:Non sequitur (logic) 1099:Community ambassador 1071:Special:NewPagesFeed 2346:Special:PrefixIndex 2076:for the discussion. 789:ImperfectlyInformed 45:Petition signatures 2829:m:Tech/Ambassadors 837:, Knowledge (XXG) 452:List of good deeds 161:Implement → Inform 82:AutomaticStrikeout 2717:release candidate 2707:: Never roll out 2664: 2172:---<)kmk(: --> 1877:Please note that 1741: 1322: 1249: 1164:---<)kmk(: --> 801: 787:comment added by 677:primary customers 385: 202: 188:comment added by 99: 36:This petition is 2895: 2662: 2650: 2611: 2565:Google Translate 2474: 2469: 2464: 2442: 2427: 2397: 2386: 2362: 2320: 2166:Introduction of 2121: 2098:Special:NewPages 2083:mw:Page Curation 1977: 1910: 1733: 1680: 1675: 1616: 1599: 1565: 1557: 1552: 1478: 1475: 1469: 1466: 1454: 1448: 1420: 1415: 1410: 1312: 1310: 1248: 1246: 1239: 1042: 1026: 995: 907:Roger (Dodger67) 808: 807:EngineerFromVega 800: 781: 711: 681:Roger (Dodger67) 614: 603: 600: 594: 455: 454: 432: 427: 384: 379: 376: 371: 338:Heimstern Läufer 270: 250: 226: 201: 182: 109: 98: 96: 88: 78: 23:WP:Notifications 2903: 2902: 2898: 2897: 2896: 2894: 2893: 2892: 2878: 2877: 2771: 2648: 2609: 2472: 2467: 2462: 2440: 2418: 2395: 2377: 2353: 2318: 2273:Trusted testers 2225: 2189: 2119: 2081:Development of 2066: 2054: 1971: 1906: 1819: 1678: 1671: 1614:John Vandenberg 1612: 1597: 1561: 1553: 1548: 1473: 1470: 1464: 1461: 1451: 1444: 1418: 1413: 1408: 1352:not a democracy 1306: 1242: 1240: 1038: 1024: 993: 826: 806: 782: 707: 612: 602: 598: 592: 590: 533:I've responded 446: 442: 430: 425: 380: 374: 369: 261: 241: 217: 183: 107: 94: 86: 79: 47: 12: 11: 5: 2901: 2899: 2891: 2890: 2880: 2879: 2876: 2875: 2869: 2863: 2858: 2848: 2837: 2836: 2831: 2826: 2815: 2814: 2809: 2804: 2799: 2794: 2783: 2782: 2770: 2767: 2766: 2765: 2750: 2749: 2748: 2741: 2734: 2730: 2726: 2720: 2709:alpha software 2688: 2671: 2660: 2642: 2641: 2640: 2639: 2622: 2621: 2606: 2603: 2580: 2579: 2552:steering wheel 2527: 2526: 2525: 2524: 2523: 2486:Slippery slope 2482: 2481: 2480: 2414: 2413: 2412: 2366: 2340: 2339: 2338: 2337: 2336: 2335: 2292: 2291: 2270: 2255: 2254: 2253: 2232: 2231: 2224: 2221: 2220: 2219: 2215: 2204: 2200: 2197: 2188: 2185: 2184: 2183: 2164: 2142: 2124:steering wheel 2115: 2114: 2113: 2112: 2091: 2090: 2079: 2078: 2077: 2065: 2062: 2061: 2060: 2053: 2050: 2049: 2048: 2047: 2046: 2017: 2016: 2015: 1993: 1992: 1991: 1934: 1933: 1932: 1931: 1930: 1929: 1928: 1856: 1818: 1815: 1814: 1813: 1803:47.222.203.135 1759: 1745: 1738: 1730: 1722: 1704: 1685: 1667: 1666: 1665: 1634: 1620: 1608: 1588: 1570: 1543: 1529: 1501: 1494: 1482: 1459: 1440: 1425: 1404: 1403: 1402: 1401: 1400: 1344: 1330:StringTheory11 1326: 1303: 1302: 1301: 1269: 1253: 1236: 1220: 1206: 1192: 1177: 1161: 1148: 1135: 1134: 1133: 1132: 1131: 1130: 1129: 1060: 1031: 1019: 1000: 989: 975: 965:PantherLeapord 956: 955: 954: 953: 952: 951: 950: 949: 948: 947: 946: 883: 882:. Much needed. 867: 866: 865: 831: 822: 816: 802: 774: 773: 772: 771: 770: 720: 705: 691: 672: 657: 643: 624: 607: 596: 587: 571: 557: 556: 555: 554: 553: 552: 551: 550: 549: 459: 438: 419: 410: 397: 389: 365: 346: 335: 325: 324: 323: 291: 276: 275: 274: 254: 213: 203: 179: 149: 134: 119: 103: 75: 56: 46: 43: 31:edit-conflicts 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2900: 2889: 2886: 2885: 2883: 2873: 2870: 2867: 2864: 2862: 2859: 2856: 2852: 2849: 2847: 2844: 2843: 2842: 2841: 2835: 2832: 2830: 2827: 2825: 2822: 2821: 2820: 2819: 2813: 2810: 2808: 2805: 2803: 2800: 2798: 2795: 2793: 2790: 2789: 2788: 2787: 2781: 2778: 2777: 2776: 2775: 2768: 2764: 2760: 2756: 2751: 2745: 2742: 2738: 2735: 2731: 2727: 2724: 2721: 2718: 2714: 2713:beta software 2710: 2706: 2703: 2702: 2701: 2697: 2693: 2689: 2687: 2683: 2679: 2675: 2672: 2668: 2661: 2659: 2655: 2651: 2644: 2643: 2638: 2634: 2630: 2626: 2625: 2624: 2623: 2620: 2616: 2612: 2601: 2597: 2593: 2590: 2586: 2582: 2581: 2578: 2574: 2570: 2566: 2562: 2561:Google Search 2557: 2553: 2549: 2545: 2541: 2537: 2533: 2528: 2522: 2518: 2514: 2509: 2508: 2507: 2503: 2499: 2498:MartinPoulter 2495: 2494:False premise 2491: 2487: 2483: 2479: 2476: 2475: 2466: 2465: 2458: 2457: 2456: 2452: 2448: 2444: 2436: 2432: 2431: 2430: 2426: 2425: 2421: 2415: 2411: 2407: 2403: 2399: 2391: 2390: 2389: 2385: 2384: 2380: 2375: 2371: 2367: 2365: 2361: 2360: 2356: 2351: 2347: 2342: 2341: 2334: 2330: 2326: 2322: 2313: 2312: 2311: 2307: 2303: 2299: 2296: 2295: 2294: 2293: 2290: 2286: 2282: 2278: 2274: 2271: 2269: 2265: 2261: 2256: 2252: 2248: 2244: 2239: 2238: 2237: 2234: 2233: 2230: 2227: 2226: 2222: 2216: 2213: 2209: 2205: 2201: 2198: 2194: 2191: 2190: 2186: 2182: 2178: 2174: 2169: 2165: 2163: 2159: 2155: 2151: 2147: 2143: 2141: 2137: 2133: 2129: 2125: 2117: 2116: 2111: 2107: 2103: 2099: 2095: 2094: 2093: 2092: 2088: 2084: 2080: 2074: 2073: 2071: 2068: 2067: 2064:Good practice 2063: 2059: 2056: 2055: 2051: 2045: 2041: 2037: 2033: 2032: 2031: 2027: 2023: 2018: 2014: 2010: 2006: 2002: 1998: 1994: 1990: 1986: 1982: 1975: 1969: 1968: 1967: 1963: 1959: 1955: 1950: 1949: 1948: 1944: 1940: 1935: 1927: 1923: 1919: 1915: 1911: 1909: 1903: 1902: 1901: 1897: 1893: 1889: 1887: 1880: 1876: 1875: 1874: 1871: 1869: 1865: 1861: 1857: 1855: 1851: 1847: 1843: 1839: 1838: 1837: 1833: 1829: 1825: 1821: 1820: 1816: 1812: 1808: 1804: 1799: 1794: 1790: 1786: 1782: 1777: 1773: 1769: 1764: 1760: 1758: 1754: 1750: 1746: 1744: 1740: 1739: 1736: 1732: 1731: 1728: 1723: 1721: 1717: 1713: 1709: 1705: 1703: 1699: 1695: 1691: 1686: 1684: 1681: 1676: 1674: 1668: 1664: 1660: 1656: 1651: 1650: 1649: 1646: 1644: 1640: 1635: 1633: 1629: 1625: 1621: 1619: 1615: 1609: 1607: 1604: 1600: 1594: 1589: 1587: 1583: 1579: 1575: 1571: 1569: 1566: 1564: 1558: 1556: 1551: 1544: 1542: 1538: 1534: 1530: 1527: 1524: 1520: 1515: 1511: 1507: 1502: 1499: 1495: 1493: 1490: 1487: 1483: 1481: 1477: 1476: 1468: 1467: 1460: 1458: 1455: 1453: 1449: 1447: 1441: 1439: 1435: 1431: 1426: 1424: 1421: 1416: 1411: 1405: 1399: 1395: 1391: 1387: 1382: 1381: 1380: 1376: 1372: 1371:MartinPoulter 1367: 1366: 1365: 1361: 1357: 1353: 1349: 1345: 1343: 1339: 1335: 1331: 1327: 1325: 1320: 1316: 1311: 1309: 1304: 1300: 1296: 1292: 1288: 1285: 1284: 1283: 1279: 1275: 1270: 1266: 1262: 1258: 1254: 1252: 1247: 1245: 1237: 1235: 1232: 1231: 1227: 1221: 1219: 1215: 1211: 1207: 1205: 1201: 1197: 1193: 1191: 1187: 1183: 1178: 1174: 1170: 1166: 1162: 1160: 1156: 1152: 1149: 1147: 1143: 1139: 1136: 1128: 1124: 1120: 1115: 1114: 1113: 1109: 1105: 1100: 1096: 1095: 1094: 1093: 1092: 1088: 1084: 1080: 1076: 1072: 1068: 1064: 1061: 1059: 1055: 1051: 1047: 1043: 1041: 1035: 1032: 1030: 1027: 1020: 1018: 1014: 1010: 1006: 1001: 999: 996: 994:Dr. ☠ Blofeld 990: 988: 984: 980: 976: 974: 970: 966: 962: 957: 945: 941: 937: 932: 931: 930: 926: 922: 918: 917: 916: 912: 908: 903: 902: 901: 900: 899: 898: 897: 893: 889: 884: 881: 877: 873: 872: 868: 864: 861: 859: 855: 851: 850: 849: 846: 844: 840: 836: 832: 830: 825: 820: 819:Insulam Simia 817: 815: 812: 811: 809: 803: 798: 794: 790: 786: 779: 775: 769: 765: 761: 757: 753: 752: 751: 747: 743: 739: 735: 734: 733: 729: 725: 721: 719: 715: 710: 706: 703: 699: 695: 692: 690: 686: 682: 678: 673: 671: 668: 665: 661: 658: 656: 652: 648: 644: 642: 638: 634: 630: 625: 623: 619: 615: 608: 606: 601: 595: 588: 586: 583: 580: 576: 572: 570: 566: 562: 558: 548: 544: 540: 536: 532: 531: 530: 526: 522: 517: 516: 515: 511: 507: 502: 501: 500: 496: 492: 487: 486: 485: 481: 477: 473: 469: 465: 460: 458: 453: 449: 445: 439: 437: 434: 433: 428: 426:Fylbecatulous 420: 418: 415: 411: 409: 405: 401: 398: 396: 393: 392:Ramaksoud2000 390: 388: 383: 377: 372: 366: 364: 360: 356: 352: 347: 345: 342: 339: 336: 334: 331: 326: 322: 318: 314: 310: 307: 306: 305: 301: 297: 292: 290: 286: 282: 277: 273: 269: 268: 264: 259: 255: 253: 249: 248: 244: 239: 235: 231: 230: 229: 225: 224: 220: 214: 212: 209: 204: 199: 195: 191: 187: 180: 178: 174: 170: 166: 162: 158: 153: 150: 148: 144: 140: 135: 133: 129: 125: 120: 118: 115: 114: 110: 104: 102: 97: 92: 89: 84: 83: 76: 74: 70: 66: 62: 57: 55: 52: 49: 48: 44: 42: 39: 34: 32: 28: 24: 20: 2839: 2838: 2817: 2816: 2785: 2784: 2773: 2772: 2719:as possible. 2716: 2712: 2708: 2666: 2471: 2461: 2435:Godwin's law 2423: 2382: 2358: 2272: 2228: 2187:Bad practice 2057: 2000: 1996: 1953: 1907: 1883: 1879:WP:CONEXCEPT 1863: 1859: 1842:WP:CONSENSUS 1828:David Gerard 1823: 1792: 1775: 1771: 1767: 1762: 1735: 1729:Buster Seven 1727: 1707: 1689: 1672: 1637: 1598:RGloucester 1578:Double sharp 1562: 1554: 1549: 1513: 1509: 1505: 1472: 1463: 1452: 1445: 1307: 1243: 1224: 1119:David Gerard 1098: 1075:VisualEditor 1066: 1062: 1039: 1033: 921:Okeyes (WMF) 870: 838: 833:Absolutely. 804: 783:— Preceding 708: 676: 659: 629:new features 628: 579:Arthur Rubin 574: 471: 464:most notable 463: 423: 350: 308: 266: 246: 222: 184:— Preceding 160: 156: 151: 112: 80: 37: 35: 18: 15: 2744:WP:ASTONISH 2737:WP:ASTONISH 2556:brake pedal 2372:leading to 2260:Jztinfinity 2223:Suggestions 2146:project FAQ 1981:Iryna Harpy 1974:TutterMouse 1939:tutterMouse 1574:Writ Keeper 1390:Iryna Harpy 1356:Iryna Harpy 1226:Cryptic C62 1009:Signalizing 979:Yngvadottir 871:Timeshifter 633:Jason Quinn 593:WikiPuppies 61:WP:ASTONISH 2866:Ergonomics 2678:Tryptofish 2302:Tito Dutta 2281:Tito Dutta 2218:available. 2036:Tryptofish 1958:Tryptofish 1846:Tryptofish 1496:SUPPORT - 1430:Rivertorch 1291:AFBorchert 1257:AFBorchert 1244:Sandstein 1196:BuschBohne 760:Tryptofish 742:Tryptofish 724:Tryptofish 667:Od Mishehu 660:Absolutely 575:completely 561:Malke 2010 190:Tazerdadog 169:Tito Dutta 95:Sign AAPT 2729:response. 2548:Windows 7 2128:gas pedal 2087:announced 1908:Doc James 1892:Guy Macon 1824:precisely 1793:potential 1763:immediate 1274:The Anome 1063:Thumbs up 1040:Doc James 709:North8000 664:עוד מישהו 521:Ironholds 491:Ironholds 444:Gilderien 441:system.-- 296:Patrick87 139:Thryduulf 2882:Category 2769:See also 2747:project. 2692:Pgallert 2540:MS Vista 2451:contribs 2406:contribs 2329:contribs 2052:Examples 1918:contribs 1533:RomanSpa 1519:Bishonen 1465:Konveyor 1050:contribs 824:contribs 797:contribs 785:unsigned 400:Jclemens 198:contribs 186:unsigned 159:and not 2711:. Have 2569:Wikid77 2306:contact 2285:contact 2168:MathJax 2150:WP:Flow 2132:Wikid77 2022:Azylber 1798:WP:BOLD 1781:WP:FLOW 1776:enlarge 1772:delight 1749:Throast 1712:Maproom 1210:llywrch 1079:WP:Flow 1034:Support 888:Kaldari 754:And at 414:Wikid77 351:moodbar 173:contact 124:Kumioko 2855:WP:VPT 2824:m:Tech 1868:Kurtis 1860:should 1817:Oppose 1673:Jeremy 1563:(talk) 1514:script 1510:people 1348:Kurtis 1176:goals. 1151:84user 1138:Stifle 1067:subset 1005:WP:VPT 858:Kurtis 843:Kurtis 694:Tiyang 582:(talk) 382:report 355:Rillke 341:(talk) 260::-( -- 2840:Other 2755:Alsee 2733:left. 2629:Diego 2513:Diego 2463:Scott 2243:Alsee 2154:Diego 2102:Diego 2005:Alsee 1922:email 1785:WP:VE 1694:Alsee 1679:v^_^v 1639:Jakob 1550:Davey 1180:...-- 1104:Diego 1083:Diego 1054:email 961:apple 936:Diego 647:Hobit 378:~~ → 313:Diego 281:-jkb- 208:MER-C 165:below 152:Agree 113:Slash 51:Rd232 2818:Meta 2759:talk 2696:talk 2682:talk 2654:talk 2633:talk 2615:talk 2573:talk 2517:talk 2502:talk 2473:talk 2447:talk 2420:Geit 2402:talk 2379:Geit 2355:Geit 2325:talk 2264:talk 2247:talk 2196:top. 2177:talk 2158:talk 2136:talk 2106:talk 2040:talk 2026:talk 2009:talk 1985:talk 1962:talk 1943:talk 1914:talk 1896:talk 1850:talk 1832:talk 1807:talk 1753:talk 1737:Talk 1716:talk 1708:more 1698:talk 1690:want 1659:talk 1655:EEng 1643:talk 1628:talk 1624:EEng 1593:Flow 1582:talk 1555:2010 1537:talk 1523:talk 1506:name 1474:Belt 1434:talk 1394:talk 1375:talk 1360:talk 1295:talk 1278:talk 1261:talk 1230:Talk 1214:talk 1200:talk 1186:talk 1182:wdwd 1169:talk 1155:talk 1142:talk 1123:talk 1108:talk 1087:talk 1077:and 1046:talk 1023:Tito 1013:talk 983:talk 969:talk 940:talk 925:talk 911:talk 892:talk 876:talk 793:talk 764:talk 746:talk 728:talk 714:talk 698:talk 685:talk 651:talk 637:talk 618:talk 599:bark 565:talk 543:talk 539:TMCk 525:talk 510:talk 506:TMCk 495:talk 480:talk 476:TMCk 468:here 448:Chat 431:talk 404:talk 359:talk 317:talk 300:talk 285:talk 263:Geit 243:Geit 236:and 219:Geit 194:talk 167:) -- 143:talk 128:talk 108:Red 69:talk 2554:or 2544:IE8 2542:), 2536:IE7 2532:IE6 2424:ost 2383:ost 2359:ost 2173:--- 2148:at 2126:or 1954:all 1446:ΛΧΣ 1419:fax 1409:Jus 1386:Sic 1308:CtP 1165:--- 736:At 535:her 504:BS. 375:123 370:Ebe 267:ost 247:ost 223:ost 65:BDD 38:not 2884:: 2761:) 2698:) 2684:) 2656:) 2649:RA 2635:) 2617:) 2610:RA 2575:) 2534:, 2519:) 2504:) 2492:, 2488:, 2453:) 2449:• 2443:DJ 2439:Th 2408:) 2404:• 2398:DJ 2394:Th 2331:) 2327:• 2321:DJ 2317:Th 2308:) 2300:-- 2287:) 2266:) 2249:) 2179:) 2160:) 2138:) 2108:) 2042:) 2028:) 2011:) 1987:) 1964:) 1945:) 1920:· 1916:· 1898:) 1890:-- 1864:We 1852:) 1834:) 1809:) 1783:, 1755:) 1718:) 1700:) 1661:) 1645:) 1630:) 1601:— 1584:) 1559:• 1539:) 1521:| 1486:Mr 1484:- 1442:— 1436:) 1414:da 1396:) 1377:) 1362:) 1340:) 1336:• 1317:• 1297:) 1280:) 1263:) 1255:-- 1228:· 1223:-- 1216:) 1202:) 1194:-- 1188:) 1171:) 1157:) 1144:) 1125:) 1110:) 1089:) 1052:· 1048:· 1025:xd 1015:) 985:) 971:) 942:) 927:) 913:) 894:) 878:) 839:is 827:) 821:(/ 795:• 766:) 748:) 730:) 716:) 700:) 687:) 653:) 639:) 620:) 613:RA 610:-- 567:) 545:) 527:) 512:) 497:) 482:) 406:) 367:~~ 361:) 330:IW 328:-- 319:) 309:+1 302:) 287:) 200:) 196:• 175:) 145:) 130:) 87:! 71:) 19:do 2857:) 2853:( 2757:( 2694:( 2680:( 2652:( 2631:( 2613:( 2571:( 2546:( 2538:( 2515:( 2500:( 2468:• 2445:( 2441:e 2400:( 2396:e 2323:( 2319:e 2304:( 2283:( 2262:( 2245:( 2175:( 2156:( 2134:( 2104:( 2038:( 2024:( 2007:( 1983:( 1976:: 1972:@ 1960:( 1941:( 1912:( 1894:( 1888:. 1848:( 1830:( 1805:( 1751:( 1747:- 1714:( 1696:( 1657:( 1641:( 1626:( 1603:☎ 1580:( 1535:( 1528:. 1489:X 1432:( 1392:( 1373:( 1358:( 1338:c 1334:t 1332:( 1321:) 1319:c 1315:t 1313:( 1293:( 1276:( 1259:( 1212:( 1198:( 1184:( 1167:( 1153:( 1140:( 1121:( 1106:( 1085:( 1044:( 1011:( 981:( 967:( 938:( 923:( 909:( 890:( 874:( 791:( 762:( 744:( 726:( 712:( 696:( 683:( 649:( 635:( 616:( 563:( 541:( 523:( 508:( 493:( 478:( 462:" 450:| 402:( 357:( 315:( 298:( 283:( 192:( 171:( 141:( 126:( 91:C 67:(

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.