headers
Cristian Consonni | 18 Jul 2012 04:10
Picon
Gravatar

Geolocalization improvement proposal

Hi all,

I have written a proposal for the improvement of the current
geolocalization system used for the geonotice, being the current one
really poor and of no use in some areas. This proposal is based on the
use of the geolocalization capabilities of modern browsers.

Having a more accurate geolocalization system would benefit both
readers, which will be reading only messages interesting for people in
their areas, and the projects by fostering direct participation in
local events.

You can find the proposal here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Geonotice

I know that the feature may be perceived as invasive so I would like
that as many people as possible share their opinion on this and I hope
that we can anyway start a discussion that will lead to an improved
geolocalization system, whichever we found appropriate.

Thanks for your attention,

Cristian

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Cristian Consonni | 23 Jul 2012 12:32
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Geolocalization improvement proposal

2012/7/18 Cristian Consonni <kikkocristian@...>:
> I know that the feature may be perceived as invasive so I would like
> that as many people as possible share their opinion on this and I hope
> that we can anyway start a discussion that will lead to an improved
> geolocalization system, whichever we found appropriate.

I am sorry to insist on this issue but having received almost no
answers in the past week I fear that I was not clear in my request.
But I indeed have some questions, so I restate them here:
* Using browser localization capabilities may be perceived as
invasive. Would you like to use browser localization tool in
Wikipedia? (yes/no, why?)
* Do you think the trade-off between bothering user asking to send
position information and potential benefits (more accurately localized
 messages) is worth?
* Are you happy with the current system ?
* Do you think a deeper study of the issue (i.e. a new survey,
conducted on a broader sample and in a more scientifically precise
way) would be useful or would help you make a more informed decision?
* Have you any further proposal for the use of the system?

Thank you, please also use the discussion page of
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Geonotice#Open_questions_.28feedback_welcome.29
for comments.

Thank you,

Cristian

_______________________________________________
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
aude | 23 Jul 2012 12:47
Picon

Re: Geolocalization improvement proposal

On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Cristian Consonni <kikkocristian@...
> wrote:

> 2012/7/18 Cristian Consonni <kikkocristian@...>:
> > I know that the feature may be perceived as invasive so I would like
> > that as many people as possible share their opinion on this and I hope
> > that we can anyway start a discussion that will lead to an improved
> > geolocalization system, whichever we found appropriate.
>
> I am sorry to insist on this issue but having received almost no
> answers in the past week I fear that I was not clear in my request.
> But I indeed have some questions, so I restate them here:
> * Using browser localization capabilities may be perceived as
> invasive. Would you like to use browser localization tool in
> Wikipedia? (yes/no, why?)
>

Yes, I think it's invasive and Wikipedians can be quite sensitive about
privacy. (even if it's all in the browser, with JavaScript, etc.)   It may
not be the case everywhere, but the IP based geolocation is good enough for
purposes of geonotices.

Right now, we pretty much opt everyone into the geonotices, though each can
be dismissed or people can turn them off with css / js.  I think people
would freak out about the more precise geolocation and more would opt out.

(e.g. whatever happened with Twitter's geolocation?  as far as I see,
people don't use it much)

> * Do you think the trade-off between bothering user asking to send
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Birgitte_sb | 23 Jul 2012 14:28
Picon
Favicon

Re: Geolocalization improvement proposal


On Jul 23, 2012, at 5:32 AM, Cristian Consonni
<kikkocristian@...> wrote:

> 2012/7/18 Cristian Consonni <kikkocristian@...>:
>> I know that the feature may be perceived as invasive so I would like
>> that as many people as possible share their opinion on this and I hope
>> that we can anyway start a discussion that will lead to an improved
>> geolocalization system, whichever we found appropriate.
> 
> I am sorry to insist on this issue but having received almost no
> answers in the past week I fear that I was not clear in my request.
> But I indeed have some questions, so I restate them here:
> * Using browser localization capabilities may be perceived as
> invasive. Would you like to use browser localization tool in
> Wikipedia? (yes/no, why?)
> * Do you think the trade-off between bothering user asking to send
> position information and potential benefits (more accurately localized
> messages) is worth?
> * Are you happy with the current system ?
> * Do you think a deeper study of the issue (i.e. a new survey,
> conducted on a broader sample and in a more scientifically precise
> way) would be useful or would help you make a more informed decision?
> * Have you any further proposal for the use of the system?
> 
> Thank you, please also use the discussion page of
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Geonotice#Open_questions_.28feedback_welcome.29
> for comments.
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Federico Leva (Nemo | 23 Jul 2012 14:42
Picon

Re: Geolocalization improvement proposal

Birgitte_sb@..., 23/07/2012 14:28:
> I am unaware of what the shortcomings of the current system are and where any improvements would be felt.
This makes it a bit hard to have a firm opinion of the trade-offs involved with changing the system. So what
exactly are the problems people are having with the current geolocation system?

As the page tries to prove, looks like the current system is completely 
unreliable and therefore useless for most geonotices in Italy and 
probably other places.

Nemo

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Permalink | Reply |
headers
John Vandenberg | 24 Jul 2012 01:55
Picon

Re: Geolocalization improvement proposal

A location gadget would be a way to start. With a gadget, it is opt-in.
On Jul 23, 2012 7:43 PM, "Federico Leva (Nemo)" <nemowiki@...> wrote:

> Birgitte_sb@..., 23/07/2012 14:28:
>
>> I am unaware of what the shortcomings of the current system are and where
>> any improvements would be felt. This makes it a bit hard to have a firm
>> opinion of the trade-offs involved with changing the system. So what
>> exactly are the problems people are having with the current geolocation
>> system?
>>
>
> As the page tries to prove, looks like the current system is completely
> unreliable and therefore useless for most geonotices in Italy and probably
> other places.
>
> Nemo
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@...**org <Wikimedia-l@...>
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Permalink | Reply |

Gmane