Article feedback/Public Policy Pilot/Feedback Survey

The first phase of the survey is designed to be simple and unobtrusive. It will consist of three questions, two of which have minor branches:

1. Please let us know why you rated this article today (check all that apply):
   • I wanted to contribute to the overall rating of the article
   • I hope that my rating would positively affect the development of the article
   • I wanted to contribute to Wikipedia
   • I like sharing my opinion
   • I didn't provide ratings today, but wanted to give feedback on the feature
   • Other
2. Do you believe the ratings provided are useful and clear? (yes/no)
   • If "No", open additional text field, "Why?"
3. Do you consider yourself an expert in the field this article covers? (yes/no)
   • If "Yes", open additional text field, "Can you describe your expertise?"
4. Do you have any additional comments? (text field)

Use of this Survey

We will be using the results of the survey to inform our design and development decisions moving forward.

1. The distribution of motivations will be used (alongside other research, data, and feedback) to determine how to present and prioritize existing or non-existent features in this feedback system - including but not limited to: feedback input (here, star ratings on 4 metrics); feedback summary (here, bar graph for each metric); feedback output (potentially reviews, comments, messages to editors, lists, updates to profile pages, and on). Responses to this answer will also highlight areas where further research and design thinking needs to take place (for example, if we see a significant bias in motivations to "opinion sharing" we will further explore iterations on the interface or new interface elements that lead to a richer opinion sharing experience).
2. The 4 metrics used in this pilot were carefully chosen to be 1) indicators of quality of Wikipedia content and values in the community 2) generally understandable by editors and readers. The responses to this question will be used to affirm or refute the clarity and efficacy of these metrics. With these responses, further iterations might include fewer or greater metrics, change in wording or descriptions of the metrics, change in presentation of the metrics, etc.
3. Responses to this question will give us a baseline percentage of the % of subject matter experts are contributing and have contributed to the overall ratings.
4. Our users love open text fields. So do we.