Wikipedia:Training/Newcomers/Training feedback/Archive 1

S Page (WMF) (talk)
Sections are short, trots along nicely.
 * What I liked:


 * What I didn't like:
 * "Nobility is one of the key criteria" typo, ha ha
 * somehow I don't have a Cite button in my edit toolbar. I have "> Advanced >Special characters > Help", but not Cite after that. I checked my preferences, weird.

Subtitles for the videos.
 * What was missing:

??? --S Page (WMF) (talk) 18:59, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * What was unnecessary:

S Page (WMF) (talk)
This is great info for the people who are willing to wade through it.
 * What I liked:

On each page there is:
 * What I didn't like:
 * Wikipedia:Training/Newcomers/Training complete
 * < Wikipedia:Training‎ | Newcomers
 * [Wikipedia Training] [Complete] _Menu_

that's too many breadcrumbs! The black and red boxes look like buttons but aren't.


 * What was missing:

If you add links to sign up (create an account), they should have a campaign=something query string so we know how many users are coming from this tutorial.

Hard to say but 18 pages is a lot of stuff in our short-attention-span world.
 * What was unnecessary:

--S Page (WMF) (talk) 22:47, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

- Gunnar Guðvarðarson (My Talk)
Well presented, nicely formatted.
 * What I liked:

Small video boxes are small...
 * What I didn't like:

Nothing i can think of.
 * What was missing:

Nothing i can think of.
 * What was unnecessary:

- Gunnar Guðvarðarson (My Talk) 01:38, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

68.14.216.43 (talk)
...
 * What I liked:

...
 * What I didn't like:

...
 * What was missing: The initial blue arrow to get started.  I navigated by clicking Menu, then the subsection links, but there was no blue arrow on start page.  Thanks.

...
 * What was unnecessary:

Shelli Burton68.14.216.43 (talk) 22:27, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

SUGGESTION TO WIKEPEDIA
...
 * What I liked:i like a broad information about the topic

...
 * What I didn't like:there is no pictures about any topic

...
 * What was missing:while i am studying any topic i feel i miss something about that topic

...
 * What was unnecessary:there is no need of matter without pictutres

--117.211.116.99 (talk) 10:49, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. ) while signing a reply, thx
That it was short.
 * What I liked:

That the Visual Editor stuff was talked about when it's opt-in. So I told people to bookmark the cheatsheet. I also linked wp:simpleintro and suggested it be bookmarked as well. I think it's a good pictorial representation of how things work.
 * What I didn't like:

Nothing I can think of at this point.
 * What was missing:

Should give it more thought.
 * What was unnecessary:

--Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. ) while signing a reply, thx 18:48, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Ngakona (talk)
...Easy and straightforward
 * What I liked:

...New way to approach editing/writing
 * What I didn't like:

...
 * What was missing:

...
 * What was unnecessary:

...
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Ngakona (talk) 06:34, 24 January 2014 (UTC) Yannick Munyura aka ngakona

87.78.170.36 (talk)
...
 * What I liked:

...
 * What I didn't like:

The Information did not take the whole screen place (much empty).
 * What was missing:

The Youtube link. Since when is Wikipedia a subsidiary of Google Inc.?
 * What was unnecessary:

...
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--87.78.170.36 (talk) 23:56, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Suitablegirl (talk)
How simple it was
 * What I liked:

...
 * What I didn't like:

Maybe a quick editing exercise to walk us through things? Like the reference section stuff? That got a bit confusing.
 * What was missing:

...
 * What was unnecessary:


 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Suitablegirl (talk) 19:07, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Laddanansari (talk)
...Adding citation
 * What I liked:

...Nothing to dislike
 * What I didn't like:

...something i will do it from online
 * What was missing:

...
 * What was unnecessary:

...I will remember all time of editing
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Laddanansari (talk) 03:59, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

krishna chalise
... was short and descriptive ... was too for for being interactive ... some detailed infos. ... all the things were necessary ...
 * What I liked:
 * What I didn't like:
 * What was missing:
 * What was unnecessary:
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--krishna chalise 07:26, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Tom Hedger (talk)
... The videos are a good way to learn.
 * What I liked:

... I would like to have an easy link to take me to suggestions for articles needing editing for at least a couple of weeks not just the very first time I try any editing,
 * What I didn't like:

... An easy way to get straight back into the tutorials if you want to stop halfway through and log off your computer, or start again or even just wander around the whole training area in a bit at a time way!
 * What was missing:

...
 * What was unnecessary:

...
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Tom Hedger (talk) 18:04, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Kekz (talk)
A more fluent and quicker tutorial than Wikipedia Tutorial
 * What I liked:

Wikipedia Tutorial is actually kind of similar though it contains more information.
 * What I didn't like:

-
 * What was missing:

-
 * What was unnecessary:

I thought it was good to start with!
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Kekz (talk) 14:57, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Nomugisha (talk)
...training was superb!
 * What I liked:

...codes were unusual
 * What I didn't like:

...I don't know
 * What was missing:

...more examples on code usage
 * What was unnecessary:

...not yet tried
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Nomugisha (talk) 13:15, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

FarazArshad (talk)
...yes i like it
 * What I liked:

...nothing
 * What I didn't like:

... nothing ...nothing
 * What was missing:
 * What was unnecessary:

... well now it become easy for me to edit any article --FarazArshad (talk) 11:02, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

007Nicole (talk)
...I liked the information and the presentation.
 * What I liked:

...I am not understanding how to start a talk page without it being rejected. I'm so nervous about this.
 * What I didn't like:

...Exact step by step on how to begin your talk page
 * What was missing:

...Pictures along with the step by step about the talk page
 * What was unnecessary:

...I still do not have how to start the first paragraph of a talk page. Is there anyone that can show me how to start a talk page that will be approved I have done some practice editing did you noticed that as well. 007Nicole (talk) 03:35, 22 July 2015 (UTC) --007Nicole (talk) 03:35, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

Didi35 (talk)
It's easy to understand
 * What I liked:


 * What I didn't like:

How to put pictures
 * What was missing:

...
 * What was unnecessary:

...
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Didi35 (talk) 10:46, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Kuyaotep 2015 (talk)
...
 * What I liked:

...
 * What I didn't like:

...
 * What was missing:

...
 * What was unnecessary:

...
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Kuyaotep 2015 (talk) 14:42, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Smdaniels (talk)
...concise and informative
 * What I liked:

...some of the terminology seemed a bit confusing
 * What I didn't like:

...
 * What was missing:

...
 * What was unnecessary:

...
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Smdaniels (talk) 18:55, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Biol&#38;steel (talk)
... the ability to perform some of the tasks immediately ... everything was satisfactory ... a more interactive guide to using the sandbox ...
 * What I liked:
 * What I didn't like:
 * What was missing:
 * What was unnecessary:

nothing was unnecessary ...
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Biol&#38;steel (talk) 21:43, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Ras Benjih &#47; RasTalk 08:44, 31 Jul
... I like citing cause it needs famous references. ... Nothing was bad ... Showing training session as TWA does. But in other ways. ... Nothing was unnecessary ... Perfect indeed -- Ras Benjih &#47; RasTalk 08:44, 31 Jul 13:55, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
 * What I liked:
 * What I didn't like:
 * What was missing:
 * What was unnecessary:
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

DamonSavich69 (talk)
...
 * What I liked: Clear, concise and informative introduction to becoming a contributor to Wikipedia. After a few brief moments of reading and limited review of the material, One becomes empowered to begin the journey that is "Wikipedia"!  Salute!

...
 * What I didn't like: As with any tutorial, the introduction to Wikipedia editing is overly verbose and repetitive in some places. It does serve to get the basics instilled in the aspiring Editor's "mind", so it is no big deal to me.

...
 * What was missing: I feel that entering the tutorial with the mind-set of becoming a "content provider", but being addressed as an "editor" might discourage those among us who have become accustomed to triggering off "keywords", and serve to deter creation of "new" content on/for Wikipedia.


 * What was unnecessary: Overall, this was a nice "orientation", since I am a newcomer and aspiring "content provider" for Wikipedia. All of my copyrights are secured, and I intend to limit my participation to verifiable, factual, and mostly "auto-biographical" content, there may have been a "touch too much" emphasis on the obvious need make sure all input is verifiable:.

... DamonSavich69 (talk) 02:20, 12 September 2015 (UTC) Damon Savich DamonSavich69 (talk) 02:20, 12 September 2015 (UTC) --DamonSavich69 (talk) 02:20, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it? Very smooth and informative presentation. Perhaps, a little "wordy" and repetitive in spots,... but well worth the invested time and consideration on my part, as an Associate of The Arts and prospective "content provider".

Maliktoomer13 (talk)
...This really can help out alot thanks
 * What I liked:

...
 * What I didn't like:

...
 * What was missing:

...
 * What was unnecessary:

...
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Maliktoomer13 (talk) 03:37, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Kimgutierrez (talk)
... The videos were very helpful ... There weren't any guided exercises. ...
 * What I liked:
 * What I didn't like:
 * What was missing:

...
 * What was unnecessary:

...
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Kimgutierrez (talk) 16:05, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Nicho806 (talk)
... Everything
 * What I liked:

...Nothing
 * What I didn't like:

...Nothing
 * What was missing:

...Nothing
 * What was unnecessary:

...It was great
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Nicho806 (talk) 04:37, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

2001:8A0:6441:EE01:3D3D:7B10:E460:6AAA (talk)
...
 * What I liked:

...
 * What I didn't like:

...
 * What was missing:

...
 * What was unnecessary:

...
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--2001:8A0:6441:EE01:3D3D:7B10:E460:6AAA (talk) 16:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Pythonislife (talk)
...The step by step simplicity and interactive session.
 * What I liked:

...It was slightly vague.
 * What I didn't like:

...
 * What was missing:

...
 * What was unnecessary:

...
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Pythonislife (talk) 21:08, 23 October 2015 (UTC)Pythonislife

Coke50ml (talk)
... the video tutorial ... none ... good for a basic ... mostly they are informative ... contribution --Coke50ml (talk) 10:22, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * What I liked:
 * What I didn't like:
 * What was missing:
 * What was unnecessary:
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

Keyshawn2015 (talk)
...
 * What I liked:

...
 * What I didn't like:

...
 * What was missing:

...
 * What was unnecessary:

...
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Keyshawn2015 (talk) 23:47, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Emmanuilovich (talk)
... Very brief
 * What I liked:

...
 * What I didn't like:

... An interactive tutorial as you start publishing your first article
 * What was missing:

... Info about quotations and references
 * What was unnecessary:

... Quite effective and concentrated
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Emmanuilovich (talk) 17:45, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

NotAnUmlaut (talk)
...Good to see explanations of the Markup language.
 * What I liked:

...Didn't see examples of how the markup language will look when previewed with all markups.
 * What I didn't like:

...See above. Would also like 'practice examples' (or acknowledgement of the Help button cheat sheet?). Citations and references are still not completely clear.
 * What was missing:

...All of it seems necessary thus far. But navigating all the help resources for newbies can be a bit... widespread?
 * What was unnecessary:

...Haven't gotten there yet, will do that next!
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--NotAnUmlaut (talk) 20:00, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Hjp3697 (talk)
It was short and to the point.
 * What I liked:

It didn't cover the article creation process in as much depth, as it possible could have.
 * What I didn't like:

More on article creation.
 * What was missing:

Nothing, it was all valuable.
 * What was unnecessary:

I didn't.
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Hjp3697 (talk) 14:32, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Aithiopis (talk)Here's what annoys me
not a lot... seems to be a groupthink
 * What I liked:

what if the reference is yourself? I never published any articles because that doesn't pay my bills but I have professional, FIRST PERSON knowledge of companies like Stirling Energy Systems and power industry engineering, much of which technology I cannot divulge due to non-disclosure agreements. But people should know how the system works, and it's clearly leaning toward the asinine idea of anthropomorphic climate change. I'm attempting to bring the truth about power production and every edit I do gets thrown away.
 * What I didn't like:

...
 * What was missing:

...
 * What was unnecessary:

...
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Aithiopis (talk) 18:13, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

LawDgarr (talk)
Examples.
 * What I liked:

Didn't find anything I didn't like.
 * What I didn't like:

Simpler setup.
 * What was missing:

Not that I know of.
 * What was unnecessary:

Not yet.
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--LawDgarr (talk) 10:10, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Accountant by Profession, Chef by Choice (talk) Wonderful introduction
... This was very well presented and pleasently laid out. I understood most of it (I hope) and enjoyed all of it.
 * What I liked:

... Just that much? Surely there's more to coding and stuff than this. This looks awfully simple.
 * What I didn't like:

... How can guys code for those gorgeous looking webpages? And boxes and icons and stuff.
 * What was missing:

...Nothing.
 * What was unnecessary:

...Videos? Did not try them.
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Accountant by Profession, Chef by Choice (talk) 19:38, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Peaceis4all (talk)
What I liked

I found what looks like other people's comments once I finished the tutorial.

What I didn't like

"I am newly joined Wikipedia" and I don't understand how to post an article on Wikipedia yet, despite the fact I read the tutorial.

What was missing 

A Note: "Wikipedia articles allow some html tags." 

What was unnecessary

This tutorial in order to write something useless.

If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

I don't know if I did try it. How could I know I did?  Comments and complaints 

 Please, Add an undo button for mobile version. This site is not mobile-writing-friendly. Copy-paste function erases further contents. Please improve it!  It would be good to understand how to write a new article. Why don't you, Wikipedia, use HTML5 and CSS3 as writing standard? (Any mention within this tutorial?)</li> </ul>

Peaceis4all (talk) 10:19, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

LlewellynDeJager (talk)

 * What I liked:
 * The tutorial video added to each lesson. It helps people see, hear and physically do/follow the instructions while they watch it.

--LlewellynDeJager (talk) 00:23, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Dil e nadan
Use more easy word so that every person can understand it in better way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dil e nadan (talk • contribs) 08:35, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Uroosa Sehar
i will prticipate in editing the article on wiki --Uroosa Sehar (talk) 10:31, 15 February 2016 (UTC) Uroosa Sehar

Short ...
 * What I liked:

Need more information ...
 * What I didn't like:

Talking about the importance of how editing will be. ...
 * What was missing:

...
 * What was unnecessary:

...
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Mercurim (talk) 21:04, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

... really simple and easy to understand training ...
 * What I liked:
 * What I didn't like:

...
 * What was missing:

...
 * What was unnecessary:

...
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Wbuddy (talk) 06:16, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

...
 * What I liked: nothing

...
 * What I didn't like:

...
 * What was missing:

...
 * What was unnecessary:

...
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Pablosuriol (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

not much I am quite new
 * What I liked:

the confusing bits
 * What I didn't like:

easier instructions
 * What was missing:

the complicated stuff
 * What was unnecessary:

I did not try it
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Abbotsholme friend person (talk) 10:57, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

...
 * What I liked:Being able to join an important group with ease !

...
 * What I didn't like: Has not come up ...yet !

...
 * What was missing:Nothing

...
 * What was unnecessary:Does not apply !

...
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it? Was helpful and make me want to get started !Mrwizardmdh (talk) 01:02, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

--Mrwizardmdh (talk) 01:02, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

... I liked the way you make it sounds as a possible challenge to execute. ...
 * What I liked:
 * What I didn't like:

...
 * What was missing:

...
 * What was unnecessary:

...
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Tumppibi (talk) 08:12, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Feedback from Roe (FreeBird415)
...Short, but informative.
 * What I liked:

...No complaints.
 * What I didn't like:

...A brief explanation of what is needed for an article to be considered GREAT.
 * What was missing:

...I found everything to be helpful.
 * What was unnecessary:

...Found it to be very useful. Thank you!
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

Best, --Roe

Feedback from ?
Have a good experience

...the tags used for doing essential things
 * What I liked:

... its v much precise
 * What I didn't like:

... video on it
 * What was missing:

...everything was fine
 * What was unnecessary:

... OK
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

Feedback from AllenHughes
...The whole idea of wikis is amazing!
 * What I liked:

...Too many little codes to learn.
 * What I didn't like:

...A basic 1-2-3 on how to write.
 * What was missing:

...Way too many words. All directions should be short.
 * What was unnecessary:

...
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--AllenHughes (talk) 20:43, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Feedback from Esmeralda000
Very easy. Speaker has clear voice. ...
 * What I liked:

n/a
 * What I didn't like:

...

n/a ...
 * What was missing:

...
 * What was unnecessary:

The videos are hard too watch. Often times they explain things by doing them but you cannot really see the screen the person is using. Maybe is my computer. ...
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Esmeralda000 (talk) 16:23, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Feedback from Lucy idegwu
...the fact that wiki actually took the time to educate me
 * What I liked:

...basically I didn't see anything wrong
 * What I didn't like:

...nothing I learned everything i needed to know
 * What was missing:

...nothing
 * What was unnecessary:

...I haven't made a decision
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Lucy idegwu (talk) 15:17, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Feedback from Mahmoud Assaf 10
... I like it being an open source
 * What I liked:

... Information needs to verified
 * What I didn't like:

... Updated information
 * What was missing:

... ...
 * What was unnecessary:
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

--Mahmoud Assaf 10 (talk) 08:15, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Feedback from Lijobro
The first lessons
 * What I liked:

I didnt understand talk
 * What I didn't like:

...
 * What was missing:

...
 * What was unnecessary:

... Fine job --Lijobro (talk) 18:13, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?

Feedback from Suma fwl
Nice article

...
 * What I liked:Content is more informative.

...
 * What I didn't like:Am feeling dufficult what sort of article content i should insert

...
 * What was missing: example articles

...
 * What was unnecessary: nothing

... Briefly understood --Suma fwl (talk) 07:34, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * If you tried the interactive editing tutorial, what did you think of it?