[SPIKE] Determine how related Checks will be combined/sequenced in initial multi-Check experience
Closed, ResolvedPublic
Actions

Assigned To

Authored By

	ppelberg
	Jul 3 2024, 10:13 PM

Description

This task invites the Editing Team to decide how/if Checks that relate to one another will combined/sequenced in the initial multi-Check experience.

Decision(s) to be made

1. To what extent – if any – will Checks that relate to one anther be combined into a single workflow in the initial multi-Check experience?

Background

@ppelberg to articulate how T359107 prompted us to confront this question.

Note: the need for the Editing Team to express an opinion about the above emerged during the team's 3 July team meeting.

Related Objects
Search...

Status	Assigned	Task
Open	None	T265163 Create a system to encode best practices into editing experiences
Open	None	T345472 Offer Edit Check(s) within new article creation
Open	None	T366743 [Epic] Enable multiple Edit Checks to be presented within a single edit
Resolved	MNeisler	T379131 [A/B Test] Run an A/B test to evaluate impact of showing multiple Checks within a single edit
Open	None	T351777 [MILESTONE] Offer Multi-Check (References) at partner wikis
Resolved	nayoub	T347530 Design user experience for presenting people with multiple checks
Resolved	ppelberg	T369235 [SPIKE] Determine how related Checks will be combined/sequenced in initial multi-Check experience

Event Timeline

Assigning this to me to articulate what we converged on as a team during today's team meeting.

For my future self: default to treating Checks as discrete/atomic in service of: 1) simplifying implementation complexity, 2) keeping Checks lightweight, and 3) creating space for us to arrive at a point of view of how Checks ought to be prioritized and presented in relation to one another.

ppelberg updated the task description. (Show Details)Jul 3 2024, 10:15 PM

ppelberg removed a project: Editing QA.

In T369235#9952164, @ppelberg wrote:

Assigning this to me to articulate what we converged on as a team during today's team meeting.

For my future self: default to treating Checks as discrete/atomic in service of: 1) simplifying implementation complexity, 2) keeping Checks lightweight, and 3) creating space for us to arrive at a point of view of how Checks ought to be prioritized and presented in relation to one another.

In short, to start we're NOT going to combine related Checks into a single workflow. If/when we come to think the impact of doing so is worthwhile, we'll revisit this decision.

[SPIKE] Determine how related Checks will be combined/sequenced in initial multi-Check experienceClosed, ResolvedPublicActions