Talk:Tech/News/Reader feedback/2017

Feedback by Anoop/ಅನೂಪ್ ^(Talk)_(Edits) 13:05, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

1. Do you get the right amount of information about Wikimedia technology from Tech News? Why or why not?

... more often i get all the information that see changes around wikipedia after viewing tech newsletter.

2. Tech News is written for people with diverse levels of technical expertise. Are there too many or too few technical details for you in Tech News?

... only sometimes(25%) i get something that doesn't concern me.

3. Is the language in Tech News easy to read? If not, what's the problem?

... yes it easy, as a translator it doesn't seems difficult while translating.

4. What else could we do better? This could be content, design, distribution, or other things?

... I think its good as it is now

5. Compared to the average Wikimedia editor, would you describe yourself as having more or less technical knowledge, or somewhere in between?

... i would add my self average technical editor category. Anoop/ಅನೂಪ್ ^(Talk)_(Edits)13:05, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Feedback by Mr. Ibrahem (talk) 09:46, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

1. هل تتلقى المقدار المناسب من المعلومات عن تقنية ويكيميديا من نشرة الأخبار التقنية؟ لماذا نعم أو لماذا لا؟ نعم ...

2. تحرر نشرة الأخبار التقنية لأفراد يتمتعون بكم متباين من المعرفة التقنية. هل يوجد الكثير من التفاصيل الفنية بالنسبة لمستواك في نشرة الأخبار التقنية؟ نعم ...

3. هل يسهل قراءة أسلوب البيان في نشرة الأخبار التقنية؟ لو لم يكن ذلك صحيحا، ما هي المشكلة في رأيك؟ نعم ...

4. ما الذي يمكننا تحسينه؟ قد يشمل ذلك المحتوى أو التصميم أو التوزيع أو أمور أخرى؟ المزيد من التفاصيل حول إصدارات ويكيميديا ...

5. مقارنة بمحرر ويكيميديا المتوسط، هل ترى أنك تتمتع بمعرفة تقنية أكثر أو أقل، أم بين بين؟ بين بين ...

Feedback by Shizhao (talk) 07:47, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

1. Do you get the right amount of information about Wikimedia technology from Tech News? Why or why not?

...

2. Tech News is written for people with diverse levels of technical expertise. Are there too many or too few technical details for you in Tech News?

too few

3. Is the language in Tech News easy to read? If not, what's the problem?

yes

4. What else could we do better? This could be content, design, distribution, or other things?

More and detail technical news, This is also a good learning process/method

5. Compared to the average Wikimedia editor, would you describe yourself as having more or less technical knowledge, or somewhere in between?

more

Feedback by Pamputt (talk) 22:42, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

1. Écrivons-nous à propos des bonnes choses – y a-t-il quoique ce soit qui manque ou dont nous devrions moins parler ?

Les sujets abordés me semblent corrects. On a un bon aperçu de l'actualité technique.

2. Est-ce que le niveau de détail est bon ?

J'aurais tendance à vouloir que l'accessibilité des informations soit améliorer. Par exemple, il n'est pas toujours évident de comprendre de quoi il est question pour les utilisateurs pas trop calés sur la technique.

3. Est-ce que les actualités techniques sont faciles à lire ? Si ce n'est pas le cas, quel est le problème ?

Il n'est pas toujorus évident de voir les impacts d'une modification sur les contributions au jour le jour. Et même quand le changement est en place, il n'est pas forcément évident de faire le lien avec l'actualité technique qui l'annonçait. Je pense qu' c'est particulièrement vrai pour les changements qui concernent l'API.

4. Qu'est-ce que nous pouvons améliorer? Ceci peut être sur le contenu, la création, la distribution ou autres aspects.

mauvaise traduction

Que pouvons-nous améliorer? Cela peut comprendre le contenu, la création, la distribution ou d'autres aspects

Pour rendre plus compréhenseible des changements visibles, il pourrait être intéressant d'associer des vidéos (muettes pour limiter le travail) qui explique visuellement la modification dont l'actualité parle.

5. Compared to the average Wikimedia editor, would you describe yourself as having more or less technical knowledge, or somewhere in between?

Entre les deux. Certains utilisateurs maitrisent énormément mieux la technique que moi mais j'arrive à bricoler 2/3 modèles en wikicode

Feedback by Tgr (talk) 23:09, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

1. Do you get the right amount of information about Wikimedia technology from Tech News? Why or why not?

Feels about right: it gives me heads-up about all changes that might affect my wiki, without being time-consuming to read. I can find out details easily by following the links.

2. Tech News is written for people with diverse levels of technical expertise. Are there too many or too few technical details for you in Tech News?

I have a fairly high level of expertise but did not find the lack of details problematic - I can almost always find them linked from the news. (It helps when the description of the linked task is kept properly up to date, which is usually the case, but not always.)

Some details that would be nice (but

3. Is the language in Tech News easy to read? If not, what's the problem?

Did not have any problem with it.

4. What else could we do better? This could be content, design, distribution, or other things?

From the MW train message a link to some "check what branch my wiki is on right now" tool would be nice. Sometimes things announced in the newsletter get reverted which can get confusing. I wouldn't expect the newsletter text to be updated because of that (sounds very difficult) but the description of the linked task should always feature a prominent warning in such cases.

5. Compared to the average Wikimedia editor, would you describe yourself as having more or less technical knowledge, or somewhere in between?

More (I am a MediaWiki developer).

Feedback by Kawsam (talk) 23:18, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

1. هل تتلقى المقدار المناسب من المعلومات عن تقنية ويكيميديا من نشرة الأخبار التقنية؟ لماذا نعم أو لماذا لا؟

... نعم لأنني أستفيد من معلوماتها دائما

2. تحرر نشرة الأخبار التقنية لأفراد يتمتعون بكم متباين من المعرفة التقنية. هل يوجد الكثير من التفاصيل الفنية بالنسبة لمستواك في نشرة الأخبار التقنية؟

... نعم

3. هل يسهل قراءة أسلوب البيان في نشرة الأخبار التقنية؟ لو لم يكن ذلك صحيحا، ما هي المشكلة في رأيك؟

... لا، لأن أسلوب البيان شبه صعب للفهم

4. ما الذي يمكننا تحسينه؟ قد يشمل ذلك المحتوى أو التصميم أو التوزيع أو أمور أخرى؟

... أقترح إضافة وصلة المرفوعات في القائمة أعلى اليسار تحت وصلة حساب المستخدم

5. مقارنة بمحرر ويكيميديا المتوسط، هل ترى أنك تتمتع بمعرفة تقنية أكثر أو أقل، أم بين بين؟

... أتمتع بمعرفة تقنية أقل

Feedback by Dvorapa (talk) 23:37, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

1. Do you get the right amount of information about Wikimedia technology from Tech News? Why or why not?

I think I get the right amount of information.

2. Tech News is written for people with diverse levels of technical expertise. Are there too many or too few technical details for you in Tech News?

I think the actual form of short one or two sentence messages with a link to details is ok.

3. Is the language in Tech News easy to read? If not, what's the problem?

I'm a technician, therefore I understand usually perfectly, what is written there.

4. What else could we do better? This could be content, design, distribution, or other things?

Links to details are usually not titled (e.g. [51]), but I would like to know whether I'm going to usual Phabricator task, Phabricator tracking task, Phabricator RFC task or mediawiki.org page or meta-wiki page or some different page before I'll actually click on the link.

5. Compared to the average Wikimedia editor, would you describe yourself as having more or less technical knowledge, or somewhere in between?

I would describe myself as having way more technical knowledge than average Wikimedia editor, maybe you know my nick from Phabricator or Gerrit.

Feedback by Alexander Misel (talk) 00:30, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

1. 你是主要从技术新闻获取的维基媒体的相关技术信息吗？为什么？或者为何不是？

... 是。方便。

2. 技术新闻是为具有多种技术专长的人编写的。那么技术新闻中的技术细节是太多了还是太少了？

... 不多不少。

3. 技术新闻的用语是否易读？如果不易阅读，是什么问题造成的？

... 英文原文足够易读，翻译成中文反而读不懂了。可能是翻译的问题。

4. 我们怎么才能做得更好呢？比如内容、设计、分发或其他想法？

...和社群保持畅通的沟通，能够即使解决看到新闻后的反馈。

5. 与维基媒体编辑的平均水平相比，您认为自己是具有更多的技术知识，还是更少的技术知识，或是介于两者之间？

...两者之间。

Feedback by Dave Braunschweig (talk) 00:38, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

1. Do you get the right amount of information about Wikimedia technology from Tech News? Why or why not?

It's hard to say. I don't know what I'm not getting. Assuming that all changes are announced, and you are asking in advance for input on things we can provide perspective for, then it is the right amount of information. I certainly wouldn't want less than what is currently included. If you're looking for something more, you could add a weekly knowledge / education item. It could be a Did you know ...? These could be based on the most frequent technology issues or questions that users seem to have.

2. Tech News is written for people with diverse levels of technical expertise. Are there too many or too few technical details for you in Tech News?

As long as links to explanations or background information are included, the level of detail is fine. Where I get lost sometimes is going from the news to phabricator and trying to follow the phab discussion.

3. Is the language in Tech News easy to read? If not, what's the problem?

It's been fine for me.

4. What else could we do better? This could be content, design, distribution, or other things?

I'd like some type of educational feature. More about how the software works, etc., or features you're working on, or features you've stopped working on. For a time, I thought we were going to have centralized templates, but nothing ever happened with that. Maybe it could be an update on how you are doing with the most requested features, etc.

5. Compared to the average Wikimedia editor, would you describe yourself as having more or less technical knowledge, or somewhere in between?

I have more technical knowledge than the average editor. I'm a long-time software developer, but with only limited experience in PHP, JavaScript, and Lua.

Feedback by —Alvaro Molina (✉ - ✔) 02:57, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

1. ¿Noticias Tec te proporciona la cantidad correcta de información sobre la tecnología de Wikimedia? ¿Por qué? ¿Por qué no?

Si, proporciona en la mayoría de los casos información clara y completa, en algunos casos las traducciones dejan alguno que otro inconveniente. Creo que en general se entrega de manera clara y correcta.

2. Noticias Tec está dirigido a personas con diferentes niveles de experiencia técnica. ¿Hay muchos o muy pocos detalles técnicos para tu nivel en Noticias Tec?

En algunos casos se entregan informaciones dirigidas a un público netamente técnico, pero mayoritariamente (especialmente en la sección de cambios recientes, cambios futuros y problemas) la información es entendible por cualquier usuario que contribuya hace algún tiempo en los proyectos Wikimedia.

3. ¿El texto de Noticias Tec es fácil de leer? Si no, ¿cuál es el problema?

Es fácil de leer y se entiende en la mayoría de los casos, como señalé en la primera pregunta, generalmente en las traducciones se suelen cometer pequeños errores de traducción, pero no genera mayor problema.

4. ¿Qué podemos mejorar? Esto puede ser sobre el contenido, el diseño, la distribución u otros aspectos.

Por el momento veo que todo esta bien y no creo que sea necesaria alguna mejora por el momento.

5. Comparándote con el editor promedio de Wikimedia, ¿te consideras con muchos conocimientos técnicos, muy pocos o en algún punto intermedio?

Yo diría que tengo conocimientos intermedios, ya que soy capaz de ejecutar MediaWiki en mi propio servidor e instalar extensiones de menor complejidad.

—Alvaro Molina (✉ - ✔) 02:57, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Feedback by Рассилон (talk) 06:23, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

1. Ви отримуєте потрібну кількість інформації про технології Вікімедіа з Tech News? Чому або чому ні?

Так, інформації у Tech News цілком достатньо.

2. Tech News написані для людей з різним рівнем технічних знань. Забагато чи замало технічних подробиць для вас у Tech News?

В принципі, достатньо. Але я б не відмовився отримувати їх трохи більше.

3. Чи є мова Tech News легкою для читання? Якщо ні, у чому проблема?

Так.

4. Що ще ми могли б поліпшити? Це може бути вміст, дизайн, поширення чи інше?

Не завадив би стислий changelog до новин про нові версії рушія Mediawiki.

5. Порівнюючи зі середньостатистичним редактором Вікімедіа, ви б описали себе як більше чи менше технічно обізнаного, або ж десь посередині?

Я розробник програмного забезпечення, тому в технічних питаннях Вікіпедії досить добре орієнтуюся.

Feedback by El Grafo (talk) 07:43, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

1. Do you get the right amount of information about Wikimedia technology from Tech News? Why or why not?

It's certainly not too much. I'm not deeply involved in the technical side of things, so I don't know if there's something missing.

2. Tech News is written for people with diverse levels of technical expertise. Are there too many or too few technical details for you in Tech News?

I think it's good as it is right now. Short and concise with links to in-depth information.

3. Is the language in Tech News easy to read? If not, what's the problem?

No problems here, imho.

4. What else could we do better? This could be content, design, distribution, or other things?

I think Dvorapa made a good proposal above. Maybe just use [[:phab:T12345]] for links to Phabricator?

5. Compared to the average Wikimedia editor, would you describe yourself as having more or less technical knowledge, or somewhere in between?

I've opened a few tickets on Phabricator – I guess that means "slightly above average"?

Feedback by --Rical (talk) 08:32, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

1. Do you get the right amount of information about Wikimedia technology from Tech News? Why or why not?

YES as simple admin.

2. Tech News is written for people with diverse levels of technical expertise. Are there too many or too few technical details for you in Tech News?

Most time the RIGHT level.

3. Is the language in Tech News easy to read? If not, what's the problem?

As admin, template-coder and Lua-coder, NORMAL, half time I need complements to better understand news.

4. What else could we do better? This could be content, design, distribution, or other things?

FINE for me.

5. Compared to the average Wikimedia editor, would you describe yourself as having more or less technical knowledge, or somewhere in between?

Professional computer-man from 1969.

Feedback by Kertraon (talk) 08:40, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

1. Disposez-vous de la bonne quantité d'informations à propos des technologies Wikimedia à partir de ce bulletin d'information ? Pourquoi ou pourquoi pas ?

Oui, bonne quantité d'informations ; mais souhait d'être aussi informé en amont, de ce qui se prépare ou est sur le point de se décider, ou en ébauche de développement ("agilité"), pour participer à valider ou réorienter ce qui est en cours de développement.

2. Les actualités techniques est écrit pour des personnes avec des niveaux différents d'expertise technique. Y a-t-il trop ou trop peu de détails techniques pour vous dans les actualités techniques ?

Bien compréhensible ; parfois je "décroche" un peu sur des termes techniques, mais en général l'essentiel reste accessible.

3. Est-ce que les actualités techniques sont faciles à lire ? Si ce n'est pas le cas, quel est le problème ?

Bien lisible.

4. Que pouvons-nous améliorer ? Cela peut comprendre le contenu, la création, la distribution ou d'autres aspects.

Contenu : voir plus haut, souhait d'être aussi informé en amont, de ce qui se prépare ou est sur le point de se décider, ou en ébauche de développement (un peu comme la méthode "Agile"), pour valider ou réorienter ce qui est en cours de développement.

5. Comparé à l'éditeur Wikimedia moyen, te décrirais-tu comme ayant plus ou moins de connaissances techniques, ou quelque part entre les deux ?

Quelques connaissances.

Merci !

Feedback by Kvardek du (talk) 16:28, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

1. Disposez-vous de la bonne quantité d'informations à propos des technologies Wikimedia à partir de ce bulletin d'information ? Pourquoi ou pourquoi pas ?

Oui, même si parfois plus de liens vers la documentation/le planning (et pas vers l'annonce uniquement) seraient utiles.

2. Les actualités techniques est écrit pour des personnes avec des niveaux différents d'expertise technique. Y a-t-il trop ou trop peu de détails techniques pour vous dans les actualités techniques ?

C'est OK pour moi.

3. Est-ce que les actualités techniques sont faciles à lire ? Si ce n'est pas le cas, quel est le problème ?

Oui.

4. Que pouvons-nous améliorer ? Cela peut comprendre le contenu, la création, la distribution ou d'autres aspects.

Diffuser à plus de personnes !

5. Comparé à l'éditeur Wikimedia moyen, te décrirais-tu comme ayant plus ou moins de connaissances techniques, ou quelque part entre les deux ?

Plus.

Feedback by Runner1928 (talk) 16:47, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

1. Do you get the right amount of information about Wikimedia technology from Tech News? Why or why not?

It seems focused on Wikipedias, or at least MediaWiki, and I'd love to see more information about how the Wikimedia sites work together. E.g., Wikidata is improving the way Commons and Wikipedias and Wiktionary and other projects work together. I'd love to read more about the engineering work underlying that effort.

I really like your invitation to join meetings and discuss on project pages. The tone is inviting and is a good fit for the newsletter.

2. Tech News is written for people with diverse levels of technical expertise. Are there too many or too few technical details for you in Tech News?

Just right. I can click through to read more.

3. Is the language in Tech News easy to read? If not, what's the problem?

Yes, it's fine.

4. What else could we do better? This could be content, design, distribution, or other things?

Just more information about Wikidata :)

5. Compared to the average Wikimedia editor, would you describe yourself as having more or less technical knowledge, or somewhere in between?

Probably more than the average Wikimedia editor.

Feedback by Tyseria (talk) 15:16, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Je ne réponds pas au questionnaire, mais il y a un ptit problème orthographique :

2. Les actualités techniques est écrit sont écrites pour des personnes avec des niveaux différents d'expertise technique. Y a-t-il trop ou trop peu de détails techniques pour vous dans les actualités techniques ?

Feedback by 93.173.5.184 17:09, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

1. האם קריאת ידיעות הטכנולוגיה מספקת לכם כמות מספקת של ידע אודות הטכנולוגיה של ויקימדיה? מדוע כן/לא?

זה בדרך כלל לא מעניין

2. ידיעות הטכנולוגיה נכתבות עבור אנשים בעלי רמות שונות של ידע והתמצאות בנושאים הטכניים. האם במצב הנוכחי ישנם יותר מדי או פחות מדי פרטים טכניים עבורכם?

יותר מדי פרטים, לאו דווקא בגלל פירוט טכני, מדווחים על שינויים מינוריים

3. האם שפת ידיעות הטכנולוגיה פשוטה לקריאה? אם לא, מה הבעיה?

די בסדר בדרך כלל

4. מה עוד ניתן לשפר? מתבקשות הערות מגוונות בנושאי תוכן, עיצוב, הפצה, או כל דבר אחר שתחשבו עליו.

במקום לדחוף בלוק של שינויים קטנים באופן שבועי, לדווח על שינויים גדולים כשקורים, ואת השאר להשאיר למחפשים. כשיש שינוי בעמוד מסוים, למשל דף ההעדפות, לתת מידע על השינוי כשאני נכנס אל הדף. שם זה יכול לעניין אותי.

5. בהשוואה לעורך ויקי הממוצע, היכן תציבו את עצמכם בסקאלה הטכנית, כמתמצאים מאד, בקושי מסתדרים עם העניינים הטכניים, או איפשהו באמצע? אני באמצע. מסתדר עם דברים טכניים באמצעות חיפוש, ניסוי וטעייה, לא אוהב לזכור מיליון פרטים טכנים.

Feedback by JAn Dudík (talk) 18:28, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

1. Do you get the right amount of information about Wikimedia technology from Tech News? Why or why not?

Sometimes are informations too short only with link to some email or phabricator, but there I must read whole thread to find details...

2. Tech News is written for people with diverse levels of technical expertise. Are there too many or too few technical details for you in Tech News?

sometimes too few, as I write bottom.

3. Is the language in Tech News easy to read? If not, what's the problem?

I read already translated TechNews, so it is easy to read.

4. What else could we do better? This could be content, design, distribution, or other things?

Sometimes there are informations about minor changes which does not affect majority of users but sometimes major changes are only mentioned (e.g. some.js.class will not work anymore) even if their impact is significant (this change breaks dozens of user scripts)

5. Compared to the average Wikimedia editor, would you describe yourself as having more or less technical knowledge, or somewhere in between?

more, but theoretic.

Feedback by RandomDSdevel (talk) 21:37, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

1.) Do you get the right amount of information about Wikimedia technology from Tech News? Why or why not?

     No, I almost but do not quite get the right amount of information about Wikimedia technology from Tech News. This is because, as I've mentioned before here, I wish that, in 'Changes later this week,' it listed more details about what changes the upcoming Wikimedia Foundation–internal releases of MediaWiki will bring to WMF wikis when mentioning such new releases. The amount of detail I would like to see added there would amount to a brief summary of the most important new changes, features, and bug fixes included in these releases. This would allow MediaWiki users on the WMF wikis to see what new changes, features, and bug fixes are coming to them in the next week without having to go through and read each new version's full release notes. Due to additional discussion on the talk page section referenced earlier, however, I understand that this is likely still not possible at this time.

2.) Tech News is written for people with diverse levels of technical expertise. Are there too many or too few technical details for you in Tech News?

     In my opinion, there are not too many technical details in Tech News that individuals who have less familiarity with the technology used to implement MediaWiki and its Wikimedia Foundation deployment would find it hard to read. Those who, like myself, have additional technical expertise do just fine with the links to Phabricator issues, mailing-list posts, and policy discussions included in each issue.

3.) Is the language in Tech News easy to read? If not, what's the problem?

     Yes, the language in Tech News is generally quite readable.

4.) What else could we do better? This could be content, design, distribution, or other things?

     I have no other specific suggestions as to how Tech News could improve its content, design, distribution, or other aspects at this time.

5.) Compared to the average Wikimedia editor, would you describe yourself as having more or less technical knowledge, or somewhere in between?

     Compared to the average Wikimedia editor, I would describe myself as having a moderate level of technical knowledge since I can edit plain wikitext, have a loose understanding of Web technologies like those on which MediaWiki and its WMF deployment are built, and am in the process of getting more familiar with programming in C++ while also documenting my resulting experiences doing that in a LaTeX document.

— RandomDSdevel (talk) 21:37, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Feedback by Noyster (talk) 23:35, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

1. Do you get the right amount of information about Wikimedia technology from Tech News? Why or why not?

• I very much appreciate this weekly update.
• Sometimes there could be more news about high-impact changes, in particular changes to the new editor's experience, relevant also to experienced editors when they interact with or try to help new editors.

...

2. Tech News is written for people with diverse levels of technical expertise. Are there too many or too few technical details for you in Tech News?

• Since you always give a Phabricator link I see no need for more technical details in the bulletin itself.

...

3. Is the language in Tech News easy to read? If not, what's the problem?

• The short sentences are not fine literary style, but evidently efforts are being made to maximise access for readers whose first language is not English.

...

4. What else could we do better? This could be content, design, distribution, or other things?

• Often seems out of date, for instance "You can join a meeting about ... on <date several days in the past>"

...

5. Compared to the average Wikimedia editor, would you describe yourself as having more or less technical knowledge, or somewhere in between?

• Not a regular Wikimedia editor, I'm experienced with most aspects of Wiki markup language and elementary template editing.

...

Feedback by Mbkv717 (talk) 07:30, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

1. האם קריאת ידיעות הטכנולוגיה מספקת לכם כמות נכונה של ידע אודות הטכנולוגיה של ויקימדיה? מדוע כן/לא?

כן

2. ידיעות הטכנולוגיה נכתבות עבור אנשים בעלי רמות שונות של ידע והתמצאות בנושאים הטכניים. האם במצב הנוכחי ישנם יותר מדי או פחות מדי פרטים טכניים עבורכם?

יותר מדי

3. האם שפת ידיעות הטכנולוגיה פשוטה לקריאה? אם לא, מה הבעיה?

כן

4. מה עוד ניתן לשפר? מתבקשות הערות מגוונות בנושאי תוכן, עיצוב, הפצה, או כל דבר אחר שתחשבו עליו.

...

5. בהשוואה לעורך ויקי הממוצע, היכן תציבו את עצמכם בסקאלה הטכנית, כמתמצאים מאד, בקושי מסתדרים עם העניינים הטכניים, או איפשהו באמצע?

עורך ויקי ממוצע

Feedback by Koussayou003 (talk) 14:39, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

1. هل تتلقى المقدار المناسب من المعلومات عن تقنية ويكيميديا من نشرة الأخبار التقنية؟ لماذا نعم أو لماذا لا؟ لا معظم الأخبار ليست عالمية وتشمل في في المعظم التغييرات في ويكيميديا ...

2. تحرر نشرة الأخبار التقنية لأفراد يتمتعون بكم متباين من المعرفة التقنية. هل يوجد الكثير من التفاصيل الفنية بالنسبة لمستواك في نشرة الأخبار التقنية؟ لا ...

3. هل يسهل قراءة أسلوب البيان في نشرة الأخبار التقنية؟ لو لم يكن ذلك صحيحا، ما هي المشكلة في رأيك؟ مشكلة تنسيق ...

4. ما الذي يمكننا تحسينه؟ قد يشمل ذلك المحتوى أو التصميم أو التوزيع أو أمور أخرى؟ التصميم ...

5. مقارنة بمحرر ويكيميديا المتوسط، هل ترى أنك تتمتع بمعرفة تقنية أكثر أو أقل، أم بين بين؟ أكثر ...

Feedback by Mr. Brinks (talk) 20:02, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

1. האם קריאת ידיעות הטכנולוגיה מספקת לכם כמות נכונה של ידע אודות הטכנולוגיה של ויקימדיה? מדוע כן/לא?

אין באפשרותי לדעת אם יש עוד טכנולגיה אם היא לא מופיעה בדף החדשות..

2. ידיעות הטכנולוגיה נכתבות עבור אנשים בעלי רמות שונות של ידע והתמצאות בנושאים הטכניים. האם במצב הנוכחי ישנם יותר מדי או פחות מדי פרטים טכניים עבורכם?

בסדר

3. האם שפת ידיעות הטכנולוגיה פשוטה לקריאה? אם לא, מה הבעיה?

בדרך כלל כן, אם כי לפעמים כאשר מדווחים על שיפור בסקירפט מסויים, ההודעה מנוסחת כאילו לקורא די ברור מה פעולתו של הסקריפט

4. מה עוד ניתן לשפר? מתבקשות הערות מגוונות בנושאי תוכן, עיצוב, הפצה, או כל דבר אחר שתחשבו עליו.

אם אפשר: מדי פעם הצעות כמו טיפים, סקריפט שימושי וכו. לא לכולנו יש גישה לעולם המופלא הזה!

5. בהשוואה לעורך ויקי הממוצע, היכן תציבו את עצמכם בסקאלה הטכנית, כמתמצאים מאד, בקושי מסתדרים עם העניינים הטכניים, או איפשהו באמצע?

איפשהו באמצע

Feedback by Kaartic ^{correct me, if i'm wrong} 04:29, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

1. Do you get the right amount of information about Wikimedia technology from Tech News? Why or why not?

Not sure what the right amount of information is, but it's useful :-)

2. Tech News is written for people with diverse levels of technical expertise. Are there too many or too few technical details for you in Tech News?

I won't say too many or too few it's ok.

3. Is the language in Tech News easy to read?

Yes, it's easy to read.

4. What else could we do better? This could be content, design, distribution, or other things?

There's one thing I haven't found useful is the information about the deployment of the new MediaWiki version on various wikis even though no side effect has been noted. I emphasised the "I" in the previous sentence because it might be just me and there might be others who might find it useful but I couldn't find how usefuls it is. Do people really find that useful? If not, it could be removed; I guess.

5. Compared to the average Wikimedia editor, would you describe yourself as having more or less technical knowledge, or somewhere in between?

You haven't told me what level of technical knowledge an average Wikimedia editor has. Assuming an average editor's technical knowledge to be some 4 on a scale of 10, I might describe myself as having more technical knowledge but to be on the safer side, I'll describe myself to be somewhere in between.

Feedback by Ceyockey (talk) 02:27, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

1. Do you get the right amount of information about Wikimedia technology from Tech News? Why or why not?

Yes. I use the newsletters as far-peripheral awareness and almost nothing is actionable for me.

2. Tech News is written for people with diverse levels of technical expertise. Are there too many or too few technical details for you in Tech News?

It is sufficiently leveled.

3. Is the language in Tech News easy to read? If not, what's the problem?

Generally, yes.

4. What else could we do better? This could be content, design, distribution, or other things?

I would be OK with receiving a link to a central copy rather than receiving the full newsletter on my talk page.

5. Compared to the average Wikimedia editor, would you describe yourself as having more or less technical knowledge, or somewhere in between?

More than average, but less than required for development on the platform.

Feedback by THE IT (talk) 07:03, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

1. Do you get the right amount of information about Wikimedia technology from Tech News? Why or why not?

...

2. Tech News is written for people with diverse levels of technical expertise. Are there too many or too few technical details for you in Tech News?

It would be nice to get more information about deprecated js functions.

3. Is the language in Tech News easy to read? If not, what's the problem?

...

4. What else could we do better? This could be content, design, distribution, or other things?

...

5. Compared to the average Wikimedia editor, would you describe yourself as having more or less technical knowledge, or somewhere in between?

a little bit more.