The problems that I'm contemplating here are, for better and for worse,
outside the scope of what I would consider harassment. I think that they
could be described as toxic interactions in general, and/or a shortage of
or long-delayed *positive* interactions at places like NPP and AFC.
Pine
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Oliver Keyes <okeyes(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
Well, we don't really have a judicial approach
either; judges get
booted when they're biased or refusing to apply the law ;). I would
agree that it is a small circle of people, and I would agree that they
have a far larger impact than numbers would suggest. Community
Advocacy is currently running a harassment consultation at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Harassment_consultation_2015 - I
suggest looking at the proposals there.
On 15 December 2015 at 19:00, Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Maybe it's just the circles that I happen to
circulate in, but it seems
to
me that a very small percentage of Wikipedians
tend to be consistently
harsh
or toxic, and that small number of people tends
to have
disproportionately
negative influence on the atmosphere in the
community. Aligned with
Jimbo's
comments at Wikimania 2014 in London, I do wonder
if their caustic nature
rises to the level where they should be excluded from the community, and
if
so, on what grounds we would make that exclusion.
Being a relentless
critic
doesn't necessarily rise to the level of
harassment if it's done broadly
rather than directed at a particular individual or group, but looking at
the
problem from an HR perspective rather than a
judicial one, I agree that
maybe more should be done to exclude toxic personalities. I wonder,
though,
how we can do that; our process for excluding
people from the community
is
more like a judicial process than like an HR
process. Maybe we need more
of
an HR approach?
Pine
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 3:51 PM, Oliver Keyes <okeyes(a)wikimedia.org>
wrote:
>
> We can probably talk about the nature of new page patrol without
> resorting to comparisons to violent, real-world overreactions with
> multiple serious injuries.
>
> To be perfectly honest as a new page patroller the biggest issue I've
> seen is toxic senior members of the community making the prospect of
> patrolling particularly unpleasant. It doesn't do much for patroller
> numbers.
>
> On 15 December 2015 at 18:28, Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > Yesterday I gave a presentation about community policing at the
Cascadia
> > Wikimedians' end of year event with
Seattle TA3M [1][2][3]. An issue
> > that
> > came up for discussion is the extent to which, on English Wikipedia,
> > experienced Wikipedians conducting New Page Patrol create collateral
> > damage
> > during their well-intentioned efforts to protect Wikipedia. Another
> > subject
> > that came up is the need for more human resources for mentoring of
> > newbies
> > who create articles using the Articles for Creation system [4]; one
> > comment
> > I've heard previously is that the length of time between submission
and
> > review may be long enough for the newbie
to give up and disappear, and
> > another comment that I've heard is that newbies may not understand the
> > instructions that they're given when their article is reviewed. These
> > comments correlate with the community SWOT analysis that was done at
> > WikiConference USA this year, in which "biting the newbies", NPP, and
> > "onboarding/training" were identified as weaknesses [5]
> >
> > Personally, I would like the interaction of experienced editors with
the
> > newbies in places like NPP and AFC to
look more like this and less
like
> > this. Granted, it's hard for a
relatively small number of experienced
> > Wikipedians to keep all the junk and vandals out while also mentoring
> > the
> > newbies and avoiding collateral damage, so one strategy could be to
> > increase
> > the quantity of skilled human resources that are devoted to these
> > domains.
> > Any thoughts on how to make that happen?
> >
> > I am currently especially interested in this topic because of my IEG
> > project
> > which officially starts this week. [6] It would be very helpful to
> > retain
> > the new editors that are trained through these videos, so improving
> > editor
> > retention via improved newbie experiences at NPP and/or AFC would be
> > most
> > welcome.
> >
> > Pine
> >
> > [1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_policing
> > [2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_reform_in_the_United_States
> > [3]
> >
> >
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Presentations_at_Cascadia_Wikimedia…
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SWOT_analysis_of_Wikipedia_in_2015.…
> > [6]
> >
> >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Motivational_and_educational_vid…
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
--
Oliver Keyes
Count Logula
Wikimedia Foundation
_______________________________________________
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
--
Oliver Keyes
Count Logula
Wikimedia Foundation
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l