This seems a start towards way to message "community health" that anyone can grasp:

On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 4:10 AM ABEL SERRANO JUSTE <> wrote:
Thank you for opening the discussion. In our research group, we are working specifically on this.

You can get a lot of good ideas and pointers to other research from the Wikimedia research page and from the last Inspire Campaign of Wikimedia, which it was precisely about Measuring editing community health:

Thank you also Marc for sharing your ideas, they are very interesting. We have already been working with inequality metrics.

El vie., 19 oct. 2018 a las 16:35, Marc Miquel (<>) escribió:
Hi Joe,

I think this project is fundamental. I'm glad you are working on it.

I have researched this topic in my PhD thesis and I went through a review of the online communities engagement literature.

Few ideas for metrics:
- Contributions inequality measurements (gini coefficients as a start).
- Multilingual editors contributions (to see whether they see Wikipedia as a global project or prefer to focus on one language).
- Core-periphery social interactions (admins-newbees, in order to detect communities more prone to mentoring)
- Rate of newbies completing the first article, rate of newbies completing the first translation, etc.
- Recency measures for newbies (different measures on editor retention).
- Community/functional roles renewal (admin, autopatrolled, etc. to see how good a community is at renewing its core along the years).

I'd be happy to further discuss the topic. At your disposal.
Best regards,

Marc Miquel

El dv., 5 d’oct. 2018 a les 23:29, Joe Sutherland (<>) va escriure:
Hello everyone - apologies for cross-posting! TL;DR: We would like your feedback on our Metrics Kit project. Please have a look and comment on Meta-Wiki:

The Wikimedia Foundation's Trust and Safety team, in collaboration with the Community Health Initiative, is working on a Metrics Kit designed to measure the relative "health"[1] of various communities that make up the Wikimedia movement:

The ultimate outcome will be a public suite of statistics and data looking at various aspects of Wikimedia project communities. This could be used by both community members to make decisions on their community direction and Wikimedia Foundation staff to point anti-harassment tool development in the right direction. 

We have a set of metrics we are thinking about including in the kit, ranging from the ratio of active users to active administrators, administrator confidence levels, and off-wiki factors such as freedom to participate. It's ambitious, and our methods of collecting such data will vary.

Right now, we'd like to know:
* Which metrics make sense to collect? Which don't? What are we missing?
* Where would such a tool ideally be hosted? Where would you normally look for statistics like these?
* We are aware of the overlap in scope between this and Wikistats <> — how might these tools coexist?

Your opinions will help to guide this project going forward. We'll be reaching out at different stages of this project, so if you're interested in direct messaging going forward, please feel free to indicate your interest by signing up on the consultation page.

Looking forward to reading your thoughts.


P.S.: Please feel free to CC me in conversations that might happen on this list!

[1] What do we mean by "health"? There is no standard definition of what makes a Wikimedia community "healthy", but there are many indicators that highlight where a wiki is doing well, and where it could improve. This project aims to provide a variety of useful data points that will inform community decisions that will benefit from objective data.

Joe Sutherland (he/him or they/them)
Trust and Safety Specialist
Wikimedia Foundation
Analytics mailing list
Analytics mailing list
Analytics mailing list