Usability, Experience, and Progress Study/Notes/Mark

Parul's Notes

Environmental Consultant
I use it everyday, multiple times a day for research and topics of interest. If I really like a movie that I saw the night before and look at the director, etc. Find out more information.
Being in the technical field, I look for areas to begin research. Has all these references I can easily follow up on.
Not a list of topics where I'm like - I really need to edit topic so and so. More stumble upon.
I saw something I wanted to edit, but I don't know if I did. I think maybe last week.
there's always something to take a look at.
had found search before he consciously realized it had moved.
i would imagine a page like this, especially a technical page has probably been reviews a lot of time. it doesn't jump out at me that there would be an issue with it. i scan a lot of times for the links. i'm also interested in family history.
looks for something to add for a long time!
goes to discussion to see if there is a reason that someone hasn't added.
didn't understand the difference between a discussion page or a talk page and haven't invested
it's just laid out a little differently
this makes a little bit more sense
this editing window is a little difficult. if someone had never done it before, they'd be overwhelmed. the combination of text and code....
goes back to the article to read the page, rather than reading it in the window.
off hand i don't have all of the dates
i can make a paragraph, so long as we remove it later.
i might create a paragraph in word
for my own ease of use. once it was ready i'd import it to the editing page and then add citations there.
"I don't know if that's true, see i haven't checked that"
it's doing the same thing i would be doing. i'm not sure. if i was writing that elsewhere. i'm not sure when i'd know when to enter a link or not.
if it hadn't mentioned gambling elsewhere in the text...probably want to link to it
would want to add links after?
types and highlights links. that's pretty cool
confirms by this symbol
i think it's better. but linking wasn't difficult - it was the references.
external webpage - i'm wondering what the difference between what a link is and a reference.
this would make sense once you got used to it. that's pretty useful.
found cheat sheet - it's all laid out for you
there used to be.....this stuff is left over.
citing pages that don't have references or resources.
it took me a while the first time.....
it's not code, computer editing ling. "infobox". i don't know, there might be....
like a credit card info. but philosophically i'm not sure that's what wikipedia wants to do.
basic and advanced table. someone could change that or the fields
so bare bones. waiting for more information - where to put borders in. it doesn't tell me anything. not sure what a table would be used for.
it still gave me a feeling of complete editability and streamlined for ease of use.
maybe i'm just using it incorrectly.
if there was something that i was passionate about -- a band i loved -- i would add a reference. not if it's something i don't care about.
creating a page on here, in my mind, is like writing an article for publication in a magazine. you would have to still take the time and involvement and effort to try and craft a quality piece of information.
not "citation needed". i know there are user groups....if i got involved in just helping out.
no personal incentive right off the bat.
how clumsy. i knew what a pain....what the difficulties are of using it. i knew what i was getting into.
there's nothing that i'm like "oh geez". navigational bar seems well laid out. search box doesn't make a difference - where it's always at.

Nimish's hilights

found moved search before he realized it, is intuitive yay!
assumed someone will fact-check it if note left on discussion page