One of my "crusades" is that Wikipedia really *is* a social network. The social aspect may not be emphasized as it is on Facebook and similar sites, but the fact is you can't do anything on Wikipedia without it being observed by others. (I note that over the years, the Wikipedia documentation has gradually eliminated the "Wikipedia is not a social network" guideline.)

Based on experiments like the Wikipedia Teahouse, I think it's better to go into Wikipedia knowing it is a social space, and to be aware that anything you create or add won't be owned by you, but is going to be a collaboration. Regarding all the different editors not as adversaries (however terse their statements) but as teachers and collaborators shouldn't diminish one's enthusiasm for adding content, and should mitigate many of the problems people have by thinking of Wikipedia as a monolithic encyclopedia.

I would never advise a newbie to jump into a controversy, but observing passively how controversies develop and resolve themselves can be an instructive lesson.

--
Bob Kosovsky, Ph.D. -- Curator, Rare Books and Manuscripts,
Music Division, The New York Public Library for the Performing Arts
blog: http://www.nypl.org/blog/author/44 Twitter: @kos2
Listowner: OPERA-L ; SMT-TALK ; SMT-ANNOUNCE ; SoundForge-users
- My opinions do not necessarily represent those of my institutions -

On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Bettina Cousineau <bdcousineau@gmail.com> wrote:

I dunno, I think for newbie editors it might be nice to let them edit what excites them during an edit-a-thon - especially if the turn-out is on the small side. Creates more ownership?

I've done the following experiment with brand new editors: picked a benign article that a new editor was passionate about (we chose hotels) and added a few sentences. The newbie was excited to see his work in the established article, and even more so when the edit was QUICKLY patrolled and removed (no citations) as I warned it would be (no citations).

The patroller also added a note to the newbie's talk page, which we replied to during the class. We visited the patroller's pages and learned about his interests and editing history (his page had his name, no gender-judgment intended) .... and the newbie spent the rest of the class checking his own talk page to see if the patroller had replied! Connection established.

This experiment serves as a useful argument against comments like "Wikipedia is badly sourced/written/etc" because the time between posting the edit and the patroller deleting it provides evidence that Wikipedia is closely monitored for sourcing/vandalism/etc.

Slightly off topic, but useful I hope. Yes, it is tough being the only Wikipedian in the 'hood....be bold and do your own edit-a-thon!

What are 10 things Librarians should know about Wikipedia in order to help their patrons become better consumers (and perhaps editors)? Compiling a list that will turn into a course on https://p2pu.org/en/ - joiners needed!

(PS "newbie" always used with affection)

Cheers,

Bettina