Folks,
When considering or referring to "The Wikipedia Community", many, if not most, thoughts run in the practical direction of the concept of Community (voting & other decision-making areas). Mine runs in a more intangible one: Anyone who contributes in a positive way to advance the values and goals of the Project.
Until recently, when I spoke of "The Wikipedia Community", I had been thinking specifically of the body of persons who actually edit the encyclopedia. And my goals have been to want this Community of persons to be regarded with dignity, respect and trust: For them to have a reasonable voice in the workings of the Project's administration and decision-making processes; and for them to have some semblance of control over their own fates within the Project.
This respect and trust must, of course, work both ways We must earn it from each other.
I'm really just brainstorming without an umbrella here:
What I'm going for is more of a sense of community than a fact of community; a sense of belonging and loyalty that can be instilled and held only though the culture. It can begin by each person being honest and asking themselves what they are doing here and why.
One outstanding positive effect this sense of community pride would have on the Project itself is that persons are less likely to freely abuse a group they truly feel they are a part of. Would you burn down your house if you still felt it was your home?
A person who feels valued by a community is less likely to abuse or harm it, or its members, if they feel they are still a part of it.
There needs to be a civility initiative in the Project that is reflected in every interaction. People need to compliment each other more, and cut each other some slack when they take risks and make some mistakes.
Take care of the new members of the Community, and remember they are learning about the culture with every new encounter and interaction.
Words have power - use them wisely; in the mind of an impressionable person they can be inspiring or deadly.
Also, there could be something similar to a Barnstar that we place on our User Pages ourselves saying something like "I am a proud Member of the Wikipedia Community" with a design such as a globe similar to the WP Globe, but with a figure of a person at the N, S, E & W locations.
I would like to see placed at the top of the Wikipedia Main Page, a banner that says something like, "Be honest - be fair - be assertive - be civil."
Wikipedia: A Community of persons building and refining an Encyclopedia of knowledge - and trying to learn how to get along while doing it.
And these community values must be shared, practiced and reinforced every single day, by every single member: This is how it is here & This is how we are. And anyone not willing to share these values, must find a community more to their liking.
For civility and a sense of Community to truly be a part of Wikipedia's identity - they must first be a part of its bloodstream.
Be healthy in the New Year,
Marc Riddell
On 01/01/2008, Marc Riddell michaeldavid86@comcast.net wrote:
Folks,
When considering or referring to "The Wikipedia Community", many, if not most, thoughts run in the practical direction of the concept of Community (voting & other decision-making areas). Mine runs in a more intangible one: Anyone who contributes in a positive way to advance the values and goals of the Project.
Until recently, when I spoke of "The Wikipedia Community", I had been thinking specifically of the body of persons who actually edit the encyclopedia. And my goals have been to want this Community of persons to be regarded with dignity, respect and trust: For them to have a reasonable voice in the workings of the Project's administration and decision-making processes; and for them to have some semblance of control over their own fates within the Project.
This respect and trust must, of course, work both ways We must earn it from each other.
I'm really just brainstorming without an umbrella here:
What I'm going for is more of a sense of community than a fact of community; a sense of belonging and loyalty that can be instilled and held only though the culture. It can begin by each person being honest and asking themselves what they are doing here and why.
One outstanding positive effect this sense of community pride would have on the Project itself is that persons are less likely to freely abuse a group they truly feel they are a part of. Would you burn down your house if you still felt it was your home?
A person who feels valued by a community is less likely to abuse or harm it, or its members, if they feel they are still a part of it.
There needs to be a civility initiative in the Project that is reflected in every interaction. People need to compliment each other more, and cut each other some slack when they take risks and make some mistakes.
Take care of the new members of the Community, and remember they are learning about the culture with every new encounter and interaction.
Words have power - use them wisely; in the mind of an impressionable person they can be inspiring or deadly.
Also, there could be something similar to a Barnstar that we place on our User Pages ourselves saying something like "I am a proud Member of the Wikipedia Community" with a design such as a globe similar to the WP Globe, but with a figure of a person at the N, S, E & W locations.
I would like to see placed at the top of the Wikipedia Main Page, a banner that says something like, "Be honest - be fair - be assertive - be civil."
Wikipedia: A Community of persons building and refining an Encyclopedia of knowledge - and trying to learn how to get along while doing it.
And these community values must be shared, practiced and reinforced every single day, by every single member: This is how it is here & This is how we are. And anyone not willing to share these values, must find a community more to their liking.
For civility and a sense of Community to truly be a part of Wikipedia's identity - they must first be a part of its bloodstream.
Be healthy in the New Year,
Marc Riddell
New Greetings Marc and list.
I think most of what you have recommended are supposed "core values" of Wikipedia already. I think the "wikilove" campaign and the welcome messages we send to new signups is the closest we get to making people feel that they are part of something good.
The current "triple crown" iniative where people work on improving Wikipedia is only aimed at experienced members.
Esperanza bit the dust about a year ago as was seen to be the Hitler Youth of Wikipedia and some editors just can't be bogged down with joining anything on Wikipedia which does further the interests of the whole community.
While projects on the community are a cool thing on Wikipedia and certainly do a great deal of good, they do very little to help editors outside of there own project.
I don't think that a pat of the back for every decent contribution is necessary and barn stars you make me want to hurl. An editor doing well needs to be encouraged if you see them around doing good by a quick note on their talk page.
As for stopping people doing bad, that is a consequence of being a top listed "google". Unfortunately they will never get a sense that they to use Marc's analogy "own their home" when will continue to tell that that we will evict them without hesitation, the next time they empty garbage in the ajoining garden.
Mike
On 01/01/2008, Marc Riddell michaeldavid86@comcast.net wrote:
Folks,
When considering or referring to "The Wikipedia Community", many, if not most, thoughts run in the practical direction of the concept of Community (voting & other decision-making areas). Mine runs in a more intangible one: Anyone who contributes in a positive way to advance the values and goals of the Project.
Until recently, when I spoke of "The Wikipedia Community", I had been thinking specifically of the body of persons who actually edit the encyclopedia. And my goals have been to want this Community of persons to be regarded with dignity, respect and trust: For them to have a reasonable voice in the workings of the Project's administration and decision-making processes; and for them to have some semblance of control over their own fates within the Project.
This respect and trust must, of course, work both ways We must earn it from each other.
I'm really just brainstorming without an umbrella here:
What I'm going for is more of a sense of community than a fact of community; a sense of belonging and loyalty that can be instilled and held only though the culture. It can begin by each person being honest and asking themselves what they are doing here and why.
One outstanding positive effect this sense of community pride would have on the Project itself is that persons are less likely to freely abuse a group they truly feel they are a part of. Would you burn down your house if you still felt it was your home?
A person who feels valued by a community is less likely to abuse or harm it, or its members, if they feel they are still a part of it.
There needs to be a civility initiative in the Project that is reflected in every interaction. People need to compliment each other more, and cut each other some slack when they take risks and make some mistakes.
Take care of the new members of the Community, and remember they are learning about the culture with every new encounter and interaction.
Words have power - use them wisely; in the mind of an impressionable person they can be inspiring or deadly.
Also, there could be something similar to a Barnstar that we place on our User Pages ourselves saying something like "I am a proud Member of the Wikipedia Community" with a design such as a globe similar to the WP Globe, but with a figure of a person at the N, S, E & W locations.
I would like to see placed at the top of the Wikipedia Main Page, a banner that says something like, "Be honest - be fair - be assertive - be civil."
Wikipedia: A Community of persons building and refining an Encyclopedia of knowledge - and trying to learn how to get along while doing it.
And these community values must be shared, practiced and reinforced every single day, by every single member: This is how it is here & This is how we are. And anyone not willing to share these values, must find a community more to their liking.
For civility and a sense of Community to truly be a part of Wikipedia's identity - they must first be a part of its bloodstream.
Be healthy in the New Year,
Marc Riddell
on 1/1/08 11:27 AM, michael west at michawest@gmail.com wrote:
New Greetings Marc and list.
<snip>
Mike
Michael,
It is time to move beyond the meager attempts there have been, and work toward the successes that can be.
Marc
On 1/1/08, Marc Riddell michaeldavid86@comcast.net wrote:
There needs to be a civility initiative in the Project that is reflected in every interaction. People need to compliment each other more, and cut each other some slack when they take risks and make some mistakes.
Coerced civility isn't sincere discourse. I must say I have met users on Wikipedia who would say nice things to random (?) people including myself for no apparent reason (other than promoting wiki-love?). My first reaction was to appreciate the thought, but the eventual result was a failure on my part to take any of their other words seriously.
Take care of the new members of the Community, and remember they are learning about the culture with every new encounter and interaction.
If there may be a corollary to "don't bite the newcomers", I'd advise "don't bend over backwards and carry on as a love-bombing cult might do". Sorry for the apparent bitterness but I still can't stress this enough.
Words have power - use them wisely; in the mind of an impressionable person they can be inspiring or deadly.
Yes, for the benefit of those who haven't figured out that positive role models exist only in fiction... yes, everyone should choose their words carefully, yes, everyone should try to be a at least as decent a person on the internet as they are in real life, and yes, everyone should avoid the urge to convert or indoctrinate others to their own way of... whatever... and above all, avoid claiming the moral high ground which belongs to nobody.
Also, there could be something similar to a Barnstar that we place on our User Pages ourselves saying something like "I am a proud Member of the Wikipedia Community" with a design such as a globe similar to the WP Globe, but with a figure of a person at the N, S, E & W locations.
Hopefully not *too similar* as the "broken globe" logo isn't released under the GFDL, and its usage is subject to WMF "visual identity guidelines". Let me know what you come up with. :-D
I would like to see placed at the top of the Wikipedia Main Page, a banner that says something like, "Be honest - be fair - be assertive - be civil."
Be bold. Be neutral. Be verifiable. Above all, be yourself.
Wikipedia: A Community of persons building and refining an Encyclopedia of knowledge - and trying to learn how to get along while doing it.
And these community values must be shared, practiced and reinforced every single day, by every single member: This is how it is here & This is how we are. And anyone not willing to share these values, must find a community more to their liking.
I really don't know how to respond to that. There's only so much you or I can ask of anyone. We're only human.
—C.W.
On 1/2/08, Charlotte Webb charlottethewebb@gmail.com wrote:
Hopefully not *too similar* as the "broken globe" logo isn't released under the GFDL, and its usage is subject to WMF "visual identity guidelines". Let me know what you come up with. :-D
Sorry to reply to this bit of an otherwise quite excellent and wonderfully thoughtful post, but to me the globe as ever been "unfinished", not "broken".
-- Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]
On 1/2/08, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonavaro@gmail.com wrote:
Sorry to reply to this bit of an otherwise quite excellent and wonderfully thoughtful post, but to me the globe as ever been "unfinished", not "broken".
Hehehe, after I wrote that I had another off-color "community-building" idea for conferring upon some of our all-time favorite Wikipedia editors the recognition they deserve: the "Broken Globe Awards" (that's when I remembered the logo is not licensed in such a way that would permit satirical derivatives).
You're familiar with the Razzies, right? :p
—C.W.
On 07/01/2008, Charlotte Webb charlottethewebb@gmail.com wrote:
Hehehe, after I wrote that I had another off-color "community-building" idea for conferring upon some of our all-time favorite Wikipedia editors the recognition they deserve: the "Broken Globe Awards" (that's when I remembered the logo is not licensed in such a way that would permit satirical derivatives).
No, you'd have to put them on Uncyclopedia ;-) Though they have no patience any more with pages about people who aren't actually famous.
- d.
On 1/8/08, Charlotte Webb charlottethewebb@gmail.com wrote:
Globe Awards" (that's when I remembered the logo is not licensed in such a way that would permit satirical derivatives).
Since when does satire require licensing? I thought there were generally provisions for that kind of thing.
Steve
On 1/2/08, Charlotte Webb charlottethewebb@gmail.com wrote:
Hopefully not *too similar* as the "broken globe" logo isn't released under the GFDL, and its usage is subject to WMF "visual identity guidelines". Let me know what you come up with. :-D
Not broken, unfinished, with regular joins rather than cracks.
-- Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]
On Jan 1, 2008 9:33 AM, Marc Riddell michaeldavid86@comcast.net wrote:
<snip>
Also, there could be something similar to a Barnstar that we place on our User Pages ourselves saying something like "I am a proud Member of the Wikipedia Community" with a design such as a globe similar to the WP Globe, but with a figure of a person at the N, S, E & W locations.
I would like to see placed at the top of the Wikipedia Main Page, a banner that says something like, "Be honest - be fair - be assertive - be civil."
I would be opposed to these purely for utilitarian reasons. There is no evidence to suggest that these foster the culture we desire. We *feel* they would accomplish something, but all evidence points in the opposite direction. Templated nice messages don't foster good feelings amongst anyone other than the most naive or new. Esperanza did pretty much exactly what you propose, and unsurprisingly, died an agonising death. They were creepy from the start - I never bought into this idea that hurling templates of politeness and barnstars of civility would actually accomplish anything, and indeed, this was acknowledged by the community when Esperanza finally closed down.
I see civility and a sense of community as desirable ends in themselves, but not something you can approach directly. Being too direct only makes it too easy to game the system (see: Esperanza), and forcing civility upon us is perhaps the epitome of incivility itself. These things have to be fostered by indirect means. They are not something you can easily create by slapping a few stickers on someone's talk page or exhorting people to be nice.
Johnleemk