The number one problem with Wikipedia seems to be the assessment of
newbies and the communication with them. We often don't have enough
information in order to see whether a contribution was made in good or
bad faith. We usually simply revert.
If the contribution was made in bad faith, that reaction is probably the best.
If the contribution was made in good faith, the reaction should be
different, trying to pull the newbie into the boat.
WMF researchers once examined the "revert ratio" and found out that
many new editor contributions are simply reverted. The communication
with them consists only of prepared, general texts, if at all. The
researchers said: You community must communicate better and write
personal texts, that works better.
But why do the experienced community members don't like to communicate
personally with the newbies? Because they don't a response in 99% of
the cases. Communicating especially with bad faith contributors is a
waste of time. Also, for technical reasons the newbies usually don't
see feedback: they don't know the version history or the talk pages.
One way to solve the problem is to make it more likely that
communication takes place, and make it easier to asses newbies.
Kind regards
Ziko
2015-06-05 14:46 GMT+02:00 Juergen Fenn <jfenn(a)gmx.net>et>:
Hello Ziko,
Am 05.06.2015 um 09:33 schrieb Ziko van Dijk <zvandijk(a)gmail.com>om>:
But I think that this is a good example for a
quantitative research
that should later lead you to a qualitative look. And maybe it is
indeed an indicator for something. In systems theory, one might think
that the social system shows an internal differentiation so that
people go to more specialized lists.
From the point of view of systems theory what matters is how system Wikimedia draws the
line between itself and its environment because that is what constitutes Wikimedia. In
other words, how open is Wikimedia still to newbies, different-minded contributors,
criticism from within, etc.
What is it that leads to changes in this differentiation between inside and outside the
system? Is it due to moderation or to the subscribers leaving, following their interest in
certain subjects?
Systems theory deals with an objective description of developments, while the latter
would be a matter for those interested in the individual motives for any changes.
Most important: There is no metrics for that, we definitely need a qualitative approach
for that.
Isnt't there literature about the traffic on
mailing lists?
Of course, there is. ;) Mailing lists have been there since 1972, IIRC. E.g., a search
for "mailing list" in First Monday yields 117 articles. Mailing lists are the
oldest type of all virtual communities.
Best,
Jürgen.
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l