Re: [Wiki-research-l] WMF Staff Introductions.

It would be interesting to see both a description of current editors in terms of their editing pattern and frequency, and a description of the editing histories of everyone who has edited in the past year. To do this, it would be useful to cluster editing patterns into * classification of editing style by recent editing pattern and frequency. * classification of editing histories by their shape and change over time. Editing style give a sense of the type of editor+editing over a given period [week? month?]. Editing history suggests an editor lifecycle and where in that cycle the editor would be. I like this measure. SJ On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 5:49 PM, Luca de Alfaro &lt;luca(a)dealfaro.org&gt; wrote: > It's difficult to tell when a person leaves, because ... you never know if a > contribution they made is the last one. > A measure would be "how many users have done an edit in the last month", and > this is actually an incredibly simple DB query to run (how fast it runs, is > another question).  This can tell you how the number of users is evolving. >  Hey, I could run this on my wikitrust database, if the Foundation does not > wish to do this :-) > Another measure, which is slightly harder but not much to compute, is the > Together these two figures (across time) could give you a pretty good > picture of what is going on. > Luca > > On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Felipe Ortega &lt;glimmer_phoenix(a)yahoo.es&gt; > wrote: >> >> Hello guys. >> >> First of all, kudos for this initiative! It's great that all researchers >> in this list can get to know the names and interests of WMF staff working on >> same topics. >> >> Additional context for Piotr. Believe me, it's really challenging to >> define a set of clear, and *exact* conditions to consider that any >> wikipedian ceased to contribute. >> >> For our analysis published by WSJ last November, we followed similar >> requirements to those in the Former Contributors Survey. In particular, we >> established 3 months of inactivity as a "reasonable" period to consider that >> an editor took a long break. The main difference is that in the Survey they >> focus on editors who reached at least a reasonable number of lifetime >> revisions (20-99), while we included everyone. >> >> I already broke down the net gain curve for different cohorts, according >> to number of edits, and there is no significant change in the trends (I >> believe that the meaningful info is the slope, not the numbers). >> >> For what is worth, I think the best constructive critic we received about >> this approach came from Jimmy Wales. Jimmy explained a useful twist to the >> methodology, that they seem to be applying for internal metrics at Wikia. >> >> Instead of trying to measure how many people "left", which will always >> have methodological drawbacks, we can ask the following question: what >> percentage of editors survived up to a certain age? >> >> For instance: what's the percentage of editors who made at least 20 >> lifetime edits who are still active one month later? Three months later? And >> then: is that percentage improving, constant, or getting worse over time? >> >> Indeed, limiting the scope to recorded revisions (the only event we can >> certainly measure) we avoid many of these methodological problems. >> >> I'm still spending time with flagged-revisions, but in case Howie or >> anybody else is interested, it shouldn't be difficult to have a look at >> this. >> >> BTW, Howie thanks for uploading the survey slides. Terrific the work you >> did, guys. >> >> Cheers, >> Felipe. >> >> --- El mar, 10/8/10, Piotr Konieczny &lt;piokon(a)post.pl&gt; escribió: >> >> > De: Piotr Konieczny &lt;piokon(a)post.pl&gt; >> > Asunto: Re: [Wiki-research-l] WMF Staff Introductions. >> > Para: "Research into Wikimedia content and communities" >> > &lt;wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org&gt; >> > Fecha: martes, 10 de agosto, 2010 20:21 >> > Welcome! >> > >> > I have to say that >> > http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Former_Contributors_Survey_Results >> > of >> > which I've just learned from your post is an excellent >> > piece of >> > research, one that was needed for a very long time. >> > >> > One question comes to mind: we now, roughly, how many >> > editors we are >> > gaining per months. Are there any estimates on how many we >> > are losing >> > (per month, year, total)? I cannot find such numbers in >> > that survey. >> > >> > -- >> > Piotr Konieczny >> > >> > Parul Vora wrote: >> > > Hello everyone, >> > > >> > > We (most of the current staff at the Wikimedia >> > Foundation currently >> > > engaging in research) had a chance to meet some of you >> > at Wikisym and >> > > Wikimania this year and thought it would be nice to >> > introduce ourselves >> > > and say hi to all of you! All of us have joined WMF in >> > the past two >> > > years and are working on projects or research >> > questions that may be >> > > relevant or of interest to all of you. Also, as far as >> > I know, we are >> > > all new to this list and will hopefully be talking and >> > collaborating >> > > with you more in the future - both here and on the >> > Meta Research page. >> > > >> > > So, in no particular order, some introductions from >> > all of us: >> > > >> > >  From Nimish <http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/User:Nimish_Gautam> >> > > (ngautam(a)wikimedia.org): >> > Hi, I'm Nimish Gautam. I started with the >> > > foundation in 2009 doing development for the Usability >> > Initiative, which >> > > focused on new editors. I like analyzing user behavior >> > to figure out how >> > > people use the tools we give them (turning templates >> > into a programming >> > > language, who would've guessed?) and spotting trends >> > so we can improve >> > > those tools to help people accomplish what it is >> > they're trying to do. >> > > Currently I'm doing qualitative and quantitative >> > research on user >> > > behavior for the foundation and its various projects, >> > and very >> > > interested in finding ways of chunking all this >> > information together to >> > > make pretty, compelling, informative resources so >> > people know what's >> > > going on in the wikiverse and hopefully want to be a >> > part of it. >> > > >> > >  From Howie >> > > <http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Staff#User_Experience_Programs> >> > > (hfung(a)wikimedia.org): >> > Hello! I'm Howie and I'm a Senior Product Manager >> > > at the Wikimedia Foundation. As a product person, I'd >> > like to work with >> > > the community towards more data-driven decision >> > making. One area I'm >> > > particularly interested in is getting a better >> > understanding of our >> > > user's lifecycle with our projects -- how they come to >> > the projects, how >> > > they start contributing, their experiences as a >> > contributor, why they >> > > leave, and why they return. I like to use both >> > quantitative and >> > > qualitative methods to obtain as complete a picture as >> > we need to guide >> > > our decisions. On the quantitative side, I'm working >> > on getting better >> > > web analytics for our projects. I'm also interested in >> > any data mining >> > > projects along these lines (e.g., contribution >> > behavior, user lifecycle >> > > patterns, etc.). On the qualitative side, I worked on >> > the "Why Editors >> > > Leave Wikipedia" survey and would be interested in >> > other qualitative >> > > measurements (e.g., interviews, surveys, focus >> > groups). If you're >> > > interested in any of the above topics, please drop me >> > a line. >> > > >> > >  From Amy >> > > <http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Staff#Public_Policy_Initiative> >> > > (aroth(a)wikimedia.org): >> > Hi, I'm Amy, the Research Analyst for the Public >> > > Policy Initiative >> > > <http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Public_Policy_Initiative>. >> > My task >> > > is to assess the project's impact on: U.S. public >> > policy article >> > > quality, public policy categorization, new articles, >> > and new >> > > contributors. Through the project I have focused on >> > article quality >> > > assessment, and worked with the community to add a >> > quantitative value to >> > > the current article assessment >> > > >> > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_United_States_Public_Policy/Quality_rating#Rubric>. >> > > As a data analyst, I am interested in improving data >> > accessibility from >> > > Wikipedia. In my dreams, I envision data from the >> > assessment tools that >> > > exist within Wikipedia are captured in a real-time >> > database, so that we >> > > can observe what is currently happening in Wikipedia >> > and how it is >> > > evolving in the present, rather than having to use >> > data dumps to get >> > > snapshots of the state of Wikipedia. I have experience >> > analyzing and >> > > designing surveys and would like to use that >> > experience to take a more >> > > in depth look at contributor demographics and >> > motivations. I am excited >> > > to be a part of this huge collaborative project with a >> > mission to make >> > > knowledge accessible. >> > > >> > >  >From me, Parul Vora >> > > <http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/User:Parulvora> >> > > (pvora(a)wikimedia.org): >> > Hi Everyone! I'm a researcher and designer with a >> > > focus on participatory and collaborative spaces. I >> > started at the >> > > Wikimedia Foundation in 2009 and moving forward have >> > interest in: >> > > creating new forms of participation (beyond editing) >> > on the projects >> > > that better engage a wider audience with the content >> > and each other; >> > > assessing, evaluating and addressing the demographic >> > and cultural biases >> > > in our projects; and exploring location, culture and >> > language as they >> > > affect the development patterns of different language >> > Wikipedias in an >> > > effort to identify potential for experimentation and >> > catalysis in >> > > younger projects. I'm currently exploring the >> > potential effect feedback >> > > systems (article ratings, expert reviews, >> > visualizations of an article's >> > > history or a user's contributions) can have on the >> > engagement of >> > > readers, actions of editors, and the quality of >> > content over time. I >> > > like infovis, ux research, and unresearched innovation >> > and I am >> > > interested in learning more about research with >> > wikipedia on motivation, >> > > behavioral economic modeling and/or game theory, using >> > geolocative data, >> > > mobile experiences, and profiling and trend >> > visualizations......and your >> > > work too! >> > > >> > > Let us know if you're interested in learning more, >> > participating in, or >> > > contributing to our efforts. And drop any of us a line >> > if we could learn >> > > from or contribute to what you've been working >> > on....... >> > > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Wiki-research-l mailing list >> > Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org >> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wiki-research-l mailing list >> Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l > > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki-research-l mailing list > Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l > > -- Samuel Klein          identi.ca:sj           w:user:sj