I have just come across a case on en.Wikipedia where the daughter of an article subject added details of his funeral (his death in 1984,w as already recorded) and his view about an indent in his life.
Her six sequential edits - her first and only contribution to Wikipedia - totalled 1254 characters, and were conducted over the space of 30 minutes. They were no the best quality, lacking sources, but were benign, and exactly what one might expect an untutored novice to do as a first change.
As well as being reverted, she now has three templates on her talk page; two warning her of a CoI, and sandwiching one notifying her of a discussion about her on the COI noticeboard. These total 4094 characters or 665 words.
How do other projects deal with such cases?
It would be nice to have a tool for long standing editors to clean up a newbies talk page for them, leave messages for the overeager templaters, and help them out / welcome them in untemolsted language.
Then a little ML could go a long way in guessing which newbies are in this situation and generating a queue for newbie-care. ~~~
🌍🌏🌎🌑
On Wed., Feb. 19, 2020, 4:35 p.m. Andy Mabbett, andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
I have just come across a case on en.Wikipedia where the daughter of an article subject added details of his funeral (his death in 1984,w as already recorded) and his view about an indent in his life.
Her six sequential edits - her first and only contribution to Wikipedia - totalled 1254 characters, and were conducted over the space of 30 minutes. They were no the best quality, lacking sources, but were benign, and exactly what one might expect an untutored novice to do as a first change.
As well as being reverted, she now has three templates on her talk page; two warning her of a CoI, and sandwiching one notifying her of a discussion about her on the COI noticeboard. These total 4094 characters or 665 words.
How do other projects deal with such cases?
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
To help with overly "shouty" templates, I did create https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Fae/talk_page_trimmer https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:F%C3%A6/talk_page_trimmer on Commons which 'shrinks' long notices on the presumption that noting a possible "copyright problem" does not need lots of threats because not everyone is a vandal. The code is open source, it's very stable and anyone on Commons can opt-in.
A system of "friendly notice alternative bots" which newbies could opt-in to if they act in good faith and want to take policies seriously could help to make any project seem less hostile. Anyone that does something like ask for help at a noticeboard, does not need to be shouted at by torch-wielding villagers. I recall several newbies fleeing the project after getting just a couple of very shouty notices and presuming everyone thought they were a crimmo.
Fae
On Thu, 20 Feb 2020 at 01:50, Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com wrote:
It would be nice to have a tool for long standing editors to clean up a newbies talk page for them, leave messages for the overeager templaters, and help them out / welcome them in untemolsted language.
Then a little ML could go a long way in guessing which newbies are in this situation and generating a queue for newbie-care. ~~~
🌍🌏🌎🌑
On Wed., Feb. 19, 2020, 4:35 p.m. Andy Mabbett, <andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk
wrote:
I have just come across a case on en.Wikipedia where the daughter of an article subject added details of his funeral (his death in 1984,w as already recorded) and his view about an indent in his life.
Her six sequential edits - her first and only contribution to Wikipedia - totalled 1254 characters, and were conducted over the space of 30 minutes. They were no the best quality, lacking sources, but were benign, and exactly what one might expect an untutored novice to do as a first change.
As well as being reverted, she now has three templates on her talk page; two warning her of a CoI, and sandwiching one notifying her of a discussion about her on the COI noticeboard. These total 4094 characters or 665 words.
How do other projects deal with such cases?
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
I can say that in Italian Wikipedia, in many edit-a-thon that WikiDonne organized, in time we had often cases where the whole newbie's user page was deleted immediately, without even warning. Because inside was write for example "this is a test" or because the page was empty.
Needless to tell you the loss of those who participate in an event and in 5 minutes see the own user page deleted or sometimes even blocked. People who already enter with lead feet, because complexed by entering and editing in a community of perfectionists (as we are seen from the outside).
Someone asks for links to demonstrate what is said, but knows that this is hard work, it means remembering everything and looking for hundreds of discussions. One should simply remember or put the guideline of good faith into practice and simply trust. Paulo has right when says that sometimes *established communities of editors treat newbies as unwelcome invaders.*
This is not an accusation email to see who is the culprit, but rather a discussion to see what can be done to improve, since we have a very big problem of retention and loss of users.
Camelia
-- *Camelia Boban*
*| Java EE Developer |*
*Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia Foundation* Diversity WG for Wikimedia Strategy 2030 *Interwiki Women https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Interwiki_Women_Collaboration | **Wiki Loves Sport https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Loves_Sport | Wiki Loves Fashion https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Loves_Fashion* WMIT https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Italia - WMSE https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Sverige - WMAR https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Argentina - WMCH https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_CH Member
M. +39 3383385545 camelia.boban@gmail.com *Aissa Technologies* http://aissatechnologies.eu/* | *Twitter https://twitter.com/cameliaboban *|* *LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/camelia-boban-31319122* *Wikipedia https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Camelia.boban **| **WikiDonne UG https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiDonne* | *WikiDonne Project https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progetto:WikiDonne *
Il giorno gio 20 feb 2020 alle ore 02:50 Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com ha scritto:
It would be nice to have a tool for long standing editors to clean up a newbies talk page for them, leave messages for the overeager templaters, and help them out / welcome them in untemolsted language.
Then a little ML could go a long way in guessing which newbies are in this situation and generating a queue for newbie-care. ~~~
🌍🌏🌎🌑
On Wed., Feb. 19, 2020, 4:35 p.m. Andy Mabbett, <andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk
wrote:
I have just come across a case on en.Wikipedia where the daughter of an article subject added details of his funeral (his death in 1984,w as already recorded) and his view about an indent in his life.
Her six sequential edits - her first and only contribution to Wikipedia - totalled 1254 characters, and were conducted over the space of 30 minutes. They were no the best quality, lacking sources, but were benign, and exactly what one might expect an untutored novice to do as a first change.
As well as being reverted, she now has three templates on her talk page; two warning her of a CoI, and sandwiching one notifying her of a discussion about her on the COI noticeboard. These total 4094 characters or 665 words.
How do other projects deal with such cases?
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
In our case the a few volunteers running (organizing) edit-a-thons, met with a few key persons who patrollers to discuss the dilemma. And so changes and new variants for the patrollers work were introduced, at the same time as the introduction to newbees by volunteers was somewhat changed.
These small changes helped a lot (but not 100%)
Anders
Den 2020-02-26 kl. 11:33, skrev Camelia Boban:
This is not an accusation email to see who is the culprit, but rather a discussion to see what can be done to improve, since we have a very big problem of retention and loss of users.
Camelia
-- *Camelia Boban*
*| Java EE Developer |*
*Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia Foundation* Diversity WG for Wikimedia Strategy 2030 *Interwiki Women https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Interwiki_Women_Collaboration | **Wiki Loves Sport https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Loves_Sport | Wiki Loves Fashion https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Loves_Fashion* WMIT https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Italia - WMSE https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Sverige - WMAR https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Argentina - WMCH https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_CH Member
M. +39 3383385545 camelia.boban@gmail.com *Aissa Technologies* http://aissatechnologies.eu/* | *Twitter https://twitter.com/cameliaboban *|* *LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/camelia-boban-31319122* *Wikipedia https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Camelia.boban **| **WikiDonne UG https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiDonne* | *WikiDonne Project https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progetto:WikiDonne *
Il giorno gio 20 feb 2020 alle ore 02:50 Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com ha scritto:
It would be nice to have a tool for long standing editors to clean up a newbies talk page for them, leave messages for the overeager templaters, and help them out / welcome them in untemolsted language.
Then a little ML could go a long way in guessing which newbies are in this situation and generating a queue for newbie-care. ~~~
🌍🌏🌎🌑
On Wed., Feb. 19, 2020, 4:35 p.m. Andy Mabbett, <andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
I have just come across a case on en.Wikipedia where the daughter of an article subject added details of his funeral (his death in 1984,w as already recorded) and his view about an indent in his life.
Her six sequential edits - her first and only contribution to Wikipedia - totalled 1254 characters, and were conducted over the space of 30 minutes. They were no the best quality, lacking sources, but were benign, and exactly what one might expect an untutored novice to do as a first change.
As well as being reverted, she now has three templates on her talk page; two warning her of a CoI, and sandwiching one notifying her of a discussion about her on the COI noticeboard. These total 4094 characters or 665 words.
How do other projects deal with such cases?
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 22:35, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
I have just come across a case on en.Wikipedia where the daughter of an article subject added details of his funeral (his death in 1984,w as already recorded) and his view about an indent in his life.
[...]
As well as being reverted, she now has three templates on her talk
page; two warning her of a CoI, and sandwiching one notifying her of a discussion about her on the COI noticeboard. These total 4094 characters or 665 words.
This is a topic that's seldom discussed and somewhat taboo in certain areas, therefore not many people are aware of what experiences many newcomers have. These events go generally unnoticed, but if you were wondering why editor retention is a constant issue, the pattern that lies behind this single case you brought to our attention is a top reason.
I've tried to help in a similar case of a footballer unknown in English-speaking countries. She was repeatedly reverted without the edits being evaluated or the rules being explained. She never returned and I was frowned upon by the admin, who was involved, for trying to help.
I've noticed this "shoot first, ask later" pattern in many cases, not just with newcomers. Unfortunately, this is all too common and a contributing factor to the toxicity.
I've noticed the following issues: 1) The general unwelcoming treatment of newcomers: "noobs" are considered lacking the proper understanding and necessary knowledge, unless they jump right into RC patrolling, which is not the sign of a new editor. 2) The lack of protection given to newcomers: "You have no rights" being explicitly said to one newcomer, that I recall. 3) Preferential treatment and authority bias: the experienced/established user is "trusted", thus must be right, therefore unwelcoming - and often hostile - conduct is not considered uncivil or it's "not actionable". 4) The excessively vilifying application of the most frowned-upon rules such as COI, socking. Editors tagged as such are treated the same regardless of the effect of their actions and whether that has caused any damage, which can scale from none to introducing bias to many articles for years.
Currently, there is no effort to mitigate these issues, to improve the policies and community practices. It's also a problem that while the "biting newbies" and "civility" policies are very well written, these are almost never applied and definitely not in the protection of newcomers. By that I don't mean these should always result in sanctions, but that the community - and primarily who get involved with handling disputes - should take these seriously, approach with a neutral mindset and remind the editors about our policies, but that almost never happens and such complaints are either ignored or blindly decided in favor of the editor with more supporters, enabling the abuse of newcomers.
Tl;dr: newcomers don't enjoy the safety net created by editors who know and care for each other and the community processes are not set up to create a welcoming and/or safe environment, this purpose is not manifested in any kind of endeavors or practices. If the WMF and the movement take the Mid-Term target of a welcoming environment seriously, that's a difficult, long-term target that will take a lot of effort.
Aron (Demian)
As a rule, (at least) in Wikipedia, with very rare exceptions, established communities of editors treat newbies as unwelcome invaders. No idea how to solve that, since it's a problem related to the nature of humane beings, not something technical. But the result is a very low rate of retention, indeed - and increasingly reduced diversity and cultural richness, which eventually ends up reflected on content. At some point those established editors also start preying at other established editors, specially when newbies are not available. The environment is awful and toxic in general.
For outreach activities to have at least a minimal rate of success, the participants need to have some kind of protection shield, such as some privileged contact with established editors willing to help them. Otherwise, edithatons and other outreach activities are basically sending lambs to the slaughterhouse. As for newbies that come to Wikipedia by themselves, they are generally on their own.
Best, Paulo
Aron Demian aronmanning5@gmail.com escreveu no dia domingo, 23/02/2020 à(s) 23:30:
On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 22:35, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
I have just come across a case on en.Wikipedia where the daughter of an article subject added details of his funeral (his death in 1984,w as already recorded) and his view about an indent in his life.
[...]
As well as being reverted, she now has three templates on her talk
page; two warning her of a CoI, and sandwiching one notifying her of a discussion about her on the COI noticeboard. These total 4094 characters or 665 words.
This is a topic that's seldom discussed and somewhat taboo in certain areas, therefore not many people are aware of what experiences many newcomers have. These events go generally unnoticed, but if you were wondering why editor retention is a constant issue, the pattern that lies behind this single case you brought to our attention is a top reason.
I've tried to help in a similar case of a footballer unknown in English-speaking countries. She was repeatedly reverted without the edits being evaluated or the rules being explained. She never returned and I was frowned upon by the admin, who was involved, for trying to help.
I've noticed this "shoot first, ask later" pattern in many cases, not just with newcomers. Unfortunately, this is all too common and a contributing factor to the toxicity.
I've noticed the following issues:
- The general unwelcoming treatment of newcomers: "noobs" are considered
lacking the proper understanding and necessary knowledge, unless they jump right into RC patrolling, which is not the sign of a new editor. 2) The lack of protection given to newcomers: "You have no rights" being explicitly said to one newcomer, that I recall. 3) Preferential treatment and authority bias: the experienced/established user is "trusted", thus must be right, therefore unwelcoming - and often hostile - conduct is not considered uncivil or it's "not actionable". 4) The excessively vilifying application of the most frowned-upon rules such as COI, socking. Editors tagged as such are treated the same regardless of the effect of their actions and whether that has caused any damage, which can scale from none to introducing bias to many articles for years.
Currently, there is no effort to mitigate these issues, to improve the policies and community practices. It's also a problem that while the "biting newbies" and "civility" policies are very well written, these are almost never applied and definitely not in the protection of newcomers. By that I don't mean these should always result in sanctions, but that the community - and primarily who get involved with handling disputes - should take these seriously, approach with a neutral mindset and remind the editors about our policies, but that almost never happens and such complaints are either ignored or blindly decided in favor of the editor with more supporters, enabling the abuse of newcomers.
Tl;dr: newcomers don't enjoy the safety net created by editors who know and care for each other and the community processes are not set up to create a welcoming and/or safe environment, this purpose is not manifested in any kind of endeavors or practices. If the WMF and the movement take the Mid-Term target of a welcoming environment seriously, that's a difficult, long-term target that will take a lot of effort.
Aron (Demian) _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
I have a more nuanced view.
The community benefits from new editors who are acting in good faith and willing to learn.
I agree that treatment of new editors can be problematic.
On the other hand, having become one of the "insiders", I now understand how English Wikipedia has a limited supply of skilled labor from volunteers who are trying to defend Wikipedia against vandals, conflict of interest editors, copyright violations, and other problems.
There is a WMF team working to improve the onboarding experience. I'm cc'ing Marshal Miller (WMF) here in case he would like to comment.
I hope I am one of those "rare exceptions" that Paulo Santos Perneta writes about. I also wish that welcoming would be neither rare or exceptional.
My habit:
- For newly registered users, which I define as someone with a redlinked talk page, I welcome them. - If I am going to revert that user's edit then warn them (via Twinkle almost always), I want to ensure that they are welcomed first. - For IP editors: - If I am reverting an obviously inappropriate edit by an un-welcomed IP editor, I typically use one of the Twinkle welcome/warning combos, such as Template:Welcome-anon-test, Template:Welcome-anon-unconstructive, or Template:Welcome-anon-delete. - If an un-welcomed IP editor, makes a revertible edit that is non-malicious, I usually do a Template:Welcome-anon without the article parameter, then add a warning - If an un-welcomed IP editor, editor is doing good, I use a Template:Welcome-anon-constructive
Peaceray
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 10:58 AM Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
I have a more nuanced view.
The community benefits from new editors who are acting in good faith and willing to learn.
I agree that treatment of new editors can be problematic.
On the other hand, having become one of the "insiders", I now understand how English Wikipedia has a limited supply of skilled labor from volunteers who are trying to defend Wikipedia against vandals, conflict of interest editors, copyright violations, and other problems.
There is a WMF team working to improve the onboarding experience. I'm cc'ing Marshal Miller (WMF) here in case he would like to comment.
Pine ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hello Peaceray,
There are many Wikipedians like you who continuously dedicate themselves to well receive and help newbies, being absolutely decisive in keeping and improving the projects health. But I was referring specifically to the core community, the one which regularly frequent village pumps and generally has a say in the project politics and community issues - no idea if you consider yourself to be or not be part of that. My perception is that such core community is generally hostile to newbies. I have been myself an active part of that core community in my home wiki pretty much since I joined 11 years ago, but I remember quite vividly how difficult it was to become part of that club, facing constant accusations of being a sockpuppet, accused of knowing too much for a newbie while getting my talk page carpet-bombed with warnings, accused of lying about my nationality, enduring childish jokes about my family name, accused of coming there to disturb what was in peace for years, and whatever. And those were the golden years, now it's way worst than that.
The basic premise for any activity related to Wikipedia, is that Wikipedia generally is an hostile environment. Whoever joins the project must be prepared to face the worst, and then anything good that happens gets to be a wonderful gain. But the stuff about how fun is to edit Wikipedia is not true a very significant part of the time. Old rats like me got to know very well over the years how to avoid trouble and get the thing to be as pleasant as possible, but the poor rookies, they are generally up to some troubled times if they really want to stay. Social media such as Telegram, where newbies can socialize with experts and get help in an easy, friendly and quick way, are playing a very positive role on that. But the onwiki situation is pretty much awful.
Best, Paulo
Raymond Leonard raymond.f.leonard.jr@gmail.com escreveu no dia terça, 25/02/2020 à(s) 19:40:
I hope I am one of those "rare exceptions" that Paulo Santos Perneta writes about. I also wish that welcoming would be neither rare or exceptional.
My habit:
- For newly registered users, which I define as someone with a redlinked
talk page, I welcome them.
- If I am going to revert that user's edit then warn them (via Twinkle almost always), I want to ensure that they are welcomed first.
- For IP editors:
un-welcomed IP editor, I typically use one of the Twinkle
- If I am reverting an obviously inappropriate edit by an
welcome/warning combos, such as Template:Welcome-anon-test, Template:Welcome-anon-unconstructive, or Template:Welcome-anon-delete. - If an un-welcomed IP editor, makes a revertible edit that is non-malicious, I usually do a Template:Welcome-anon without the article parameter, then add a warning - If an un-welcomed IP editor, editor is doing good, I use a Template:Welcome-anon-constructive
Peaceray
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 10:58 AM Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
I have a more nuanced view.
The community benefits from new editors who are acting in good faith and willing to learn.
I agree that treatment of new editors can be problematic.
On the other hand, having become one of the "insiders", I now understand how English Wikipedia has a limited supply of skilled labor from volunteers who are trying to defend Wikipedia against vandals, conflict of interest editors, copyright violations, and other problems.
There is a WMF team working to improve the onboarding experience. I'm cc'ing Marshal Miller (WMF) here in case he would like to comment.
Pine ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Also, overworked groups with large backlogs struggling to maintain high quality tend to have less patience with the inexperienced and not-yet-competent than we might like. It is also possible that some of the workers in those groups are not as competent as we would like them to be, but at those wages, what can you expect? The work probably also attracts a share of people who get their kicks out of telling other people what they can't do. Again, they are volunteers, we accept their offer to help in good faith until they prove otherwise. The competent and really incompetent are the easy cases. The not quite competent are harder to deal with. Will they get better or worse with experience? Some competence is required to edit Wikipedia. A suitable personality also helps a lot. However, an enormous amount of work gets done quietly and without fanfare and drama, if one chooses the topic carefully, and edits with discretion and a reasonable level of willingness to cooperate. Cheers, Peter
-----Original Message----- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Paulo Santos Perneta Sent: 25 February 2020 20:03 To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Treatment of newbies with mild CoI
As a rule, (at least) in Wikipedia, with very rare exceptions, established communities of editors treat newbies as unwelcome invaders. No idea how to solve that, since it's a problem related to the nature of humane beings, not something technical. But the result is a very low rate of retention, indeed - and increasingly reduced diversity and cultural richness, which eventually ends up reflected on content. At some point those established editors also start preying at other established editors, specially when newbies are not available. The environment is awful and toxic in general.
For outreach activities to have at least a minimal rate of success, the participants need to have some kind of protection shield, such as some privileged contact with established editors willing to help them. Otherwise, edithatons and other outreach activities are basically sending lambs to the slaughterhouse. As for newbies that come to Wikipedia by themselves, they are generally on their own.
Best, Paulo
Aron Demian aronmanning5@gmail.com escreveu no dia domingo, 23/02/2020 à(s) 23:30:
On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 22:35, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
I have just come across a case on en.Wikipedia where the daughter of an article subject added details of his funeral (his death in 1984,w as already recorded) and his view about an indent in his life.
[...]
As well as being reverted, she now has three templates on her talk
page; two warning her of a CoI, and sandwiching one notifying her of a discussion about her on the COI noticeboard. These total 4094 characters or 665 words.
This is a topic that's seldom discussed and somewhat taboo in certain areas, therefore not many people are aware of what experiences many newcomers have. These events go generally unnoticed, but if you were wondering why editor retention is a constant issue, the pattern that lies behind this single case you brought to our attention is a top reason.
I've tried to help in a similar case of a footballer unknown in English-speaking countries. She was repeatedly reverted without the edits being evaluated or the rules being explained. She never returned and I was frowned upon by the admin, who was involved, for trying to help.
I've noticed this "shoot first, ask later" pattern in many cases, not just with newcomers. Unfortunately, this is all too common and a contributing factor to the toxicity.
I've noticed the following issues:
- The general unwelcoming treatment of newcomers: "noobs" are considered
lacking the proper understanding and necessary knowledge, unless they jump right into RC patrolling, which is not the sign of a new editor. 2) The lack of protection given to newcomers: "You have no rights" being explicitly said to one newcomer, that I recall. 3) Preferential treatment and authority bias: the experienced/established user is "trusted", thus must be right, therefore unwelcoming - and often hostile - conduct is not considered uncivil or it's "not actionable". 4) The excessively vilifying application of the most frowned-upon rules such as COI, socking. Editors tagged as such are treated the same regardless of the effect of their actions and whether that has caused any damage, which can scale from none to introducing bias to many articles for years.
Currently, there is no effort to mitigate these issues, to improve the policies and community practices. It's also a problem that while the "biting newbies" and "civility" policies are very well written, these are almost never applied and definitely not in the protection of newcomers. By that I don't mean these should always result in sanctions, but that the community - and primarily who get involved with handling disputes - should take these seriously, approach with a neutral mindset and remind the editors about our policies, but that almost never happens and such complaints are either ignored or blindly decided in favor of the editor with more supporters, enabling the abuse of newcomers.
Tl;dr: newcomers don't enjoy the safety net created by editors who know and care for each other and the community processes are not set up to create a welcoming and/or safe environment, this purpose is not manifested in any kind of endeavors or practices. If the WMF and the movement take the Mid-Term target of a welcoming environment seriously, that's a difficult, long-term target that will take a lot of effort.
Aron (Demian) _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
I have 15 years experience on the coal face, and now more than 10 years actively encouraging others to part of that. I come from the time where the community was growing really fast and templates werent available for every action, that meant we had to leave personal message explaining what had taken place. Currently anyone can react at the twinkle of an eye to do the same thing 100 times in a minute with all the necessary policy links already there, nothing is written with a personal touch, there is no measure of encouragement its just a cold machine response even the edit summary is a cold you've been twinkled upon. We have forgotten to Assume Good Faith when its appropriate.
Doing outreach, workshops, editathons and other such events we need to step away from retention being the be all of these events, the aim of these events is content, connection, and community every edit whether its just one or one million is to improve and share knowledge. The more we get hung up on volume the less we value quality and diversity, outreach is building access to knowledge creating a path for others follow.
Twinkle is great tool in combating vandalism, and spam but its very poor tool for building community and becomes extremely dangerous when its applied as a training aid or for contributor there are no workshops, no outreach, no twinkleathons to teach people how to use it effectively just log a few edits ask nicely at a notice board and voila you're armed to zap template where ever, when ever. Twinkle needs to have limits placed on actions, some review process of those actions - 100 actions in your first 30 days then its disable until some reviews. We could even consider a limit to its use until a person has gained community trust as an admin, if person can only whack 100 people a month they are going to consider/value their decision when they do so, we might see a lot less templates and more talking.
On the subject of a twinlkeathon, twinlkeshop Wikimania 2020 is looking for such activities maybe you can help improve its use
On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 at 14:32, Peter Southwood peter.southwood@telkomsa.net wrote:
Also, overworked groups with large backlogs struggling to maintain high quality tend to have less patience with the inexperienced and not-yet-competent than we might like. It is also possible that some of the workers in those groups are not as competent as we would like them to be, but at those wages, what can you expect? The work probably also attracts a share of people who get their kicks out of telling other people what they can't do. Again, they are volunteers, we accept their offer to help in good faith until they prove otherwise. The competent and really incompetent are the easy cases. The not quite competent are harder to deal with. Will they get better or worse with experience? Some competence is required to edit Wikipedia. A suitable personality also helps a lot. However, an enormous amount of work gets done quietly and without fanfare and drama, if one chooses the topic carefully, and edits with discretion and a reasonable level of willingness to cooperate. Cheers, Peter
-----Original Message----- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Paulo Santos Perneta Sent: 25 February 2020 20:03 To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Treatment of newbies with mild CoI
As a rule, (at least) in Wikipedia, with very rare exceptions, established communities of editors treat newbies as unwelcome invaders. No idea how to solve that, since it's a problem related to the nature of humane beings, not something technical. But the result is a very low rate of retention, indeed - and increasingly reduced diversity and cultural richness, which eventually ends up reflected on content. At some point those established editors also start preying at other established editors, specially when newbies are not available. The environment is awful and toxic in general.
For outreach activities to have at least a minimal rate of success, the participants need to have some kind of protection shield, such as some privileged contact with established editors willing to help them. Otherwise, edithatons and other outreach activities are basically sending lambs to the slaughterhouse. As for newbies that come to Wikipedia by themselves, they are generally on their own.
Best, Paulo
Aron Demian aronmanning5@gmail.com escreveu no dia domingo, 23/02/2020 à(s) 23:30:
On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 22:35, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
I have just come across a case on en.Wikipedia where the daughter of an article subject added details of his funeral (his death in 1984,w as already recorded) and his view about an indent in his life.
[...]
As well as being reverted, she now has three templates on her talk
page; two warning her of a CoI, and sandwiching one notifying her of a discussion about her on the COI noticeboard. These total 4094 characters or 665 words.
This is a topic that's seldom discussed and somewhat taboo in certain areas, therefore not many people are aware of what experiences many newcomers have. These events go generally unnoticed, but if you were wondering why editor retention is a constant issue, the pattern that lies behind this single case you brought to our attention is a top reason.
I've tried to help in a similar case of a footballer unknown in English-speaking countries. She was repeatedly reverted without the edits being evaluated or the rules being explained. She never returned and I
was
frowned upon by the admin, who was involved, for trying to help.
I've noticed this "shoot first, ask later" pattern in many cases, not
just
with newcomers. Unfortunately, this is all too common and a contributing factor to the toxicity.
I've noticed the following issues:
- The general unwelcoming treatment of newcomers: "noobs" are considered
lacking the proper understanding and necessary knowledge, unless they
jump
right into RC patrolling, which is not the sign of a new editor. 2) The lack of protection given to newcomers: "You have no rights" being explicitly said to one newcomer, that I recall. 3) Preferential treatment and authority bias: the experienced/established user is "trusted", thus must be right, therefore unwelcoming - and often hostile - conduct is not considered uncivil or it's "not actionable". 4) The excessively vilifying application of the most frowned-upon rules such as COI, socking. Editors tagged as such are treated the same regardless of the effect of their actions and whether that has caused any damage, which can scale from none to introducing bias to many articles
for
years.
Currently, there is no effort to mitigate these issues, to improve the policies and community practices. It's also a problem that while the "biting newbies" and "civility" policies are very well written, these are almost never applied and definitely not in the protection of newcomers.
By
that I don't mean these should always result in sanctions, but that the community - and primarily who get involved with handling disputes -
should
take these seriously, approach with a neutral mindset and remind the editors about our policies, but that almost never happens and such complaints are either ignored or blindly decided in favor of the editor with more supporters, enabling the abuse of newcomers.
Tl;dr: newcomers don't enjoy the safety net created by editors who know and care for each other and the community processes are not set up to create a welcoming and/or safe environment, this purpose is not
manifested
in any kind of endeavors or practices. If the WMF and the movement take
the
Mid-Term target of a welcoming environment seriously, that's a difficult, long-term target that will take a lot of effort.
Aron (Demian) _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Sometimes, instead of patrolling recent changes for vandalism, I'll change the filter to "good faith edits" and "unregistered". A lot of edits made under IP addresses are constructive, and I send out welcomes that way. I also check my watchlist and welcome people. I like using the thank button as well, and give wikilove (to new and experienced editors). I find that reachng out to a newbie with a personal message along the lines of "you're doing a good work and I noticed that" is usually fairly well-recieved.
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020, 1:03 PM Paulo Santos Perneta paulosperneta@gmail.com wrote:
As a rule, (at least) in Wikipedia, with very rare exceptions, established communities of editors treat newbies as unwelcome invaders. No idea how to solve that, since it's a problem related to the nature of humane beings, not something technical. But the result is a very low rate of retention, indeed - and increasingly reduced diversity and cultural richness, which eventually ends up reflected on content. At some point those established editors also start preying at other established editors, specially when newbies are not available. The environment is awful and toxic in general.
For outreach activities to have at least a minimal rate of success, the participants need to have some kind of protection shield, such as some privileged contact with established editors willing to help them. Otherwise, edithatons and other outreach activities are basically sending lambs to the slaughterhouse. As for newbies that come to Wikipedia by themselves, they are generally on their own.
Best, Paulo
Aron Demian aronmanning5@gmail.com escreveu no dia domingo, 23/02/2020 à(s) 23:30:
On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 22:35, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
I have just come across a case on en.Wikipedia where the daughter of an article subject added details of his funeral (his death in 1984,w as already recorded) and his view about an indent in his life.
[...]
As well as being reverted, she now has three templates on her talk
page; two warning her of a CoI, and sandwiching one notifying her of a discussion about her on the COI noticeboard. These total 4094 characters or 665 words.
This is a topic that's seldom discussed and somewhat taboo in certain areas, therefore not many people are aware of what experiences many newcomers have. These events go generally unnoticed, but if you were wondering why editor retention is a constant issue, the pattern that lies behind this single case you brought to our attention is a top reason.
I've tried to help in a similar case of a footballer unknown in English-speaking countries. She was repeatedly reverted without the edits being evaluated or the rules being explained. She never returned and I
was
frowned upon by the admin, who was involved, for trying to help.
I've noticed this "shoot first, ask later" pattern in many cases, not
just
with newcomers. Unfortunately, this is all too common and a contributing factor to the toxicity.
I've noticed the following issues:
- The general unwelcoming treatment of newcomers: "noobs" are considered
lacking the proper understanding and necessary knowledge, unless they
jump
right into RC patrolling, which is not the sign of a new editor. 2) The lack of protection given to newcomers: "You have no rights" being explicitly said to one newcomer, that I recall. 3) Preferential treatment and authority bias: the experienced/established user is "trusted", thus must be right, therefore unwelcoming - and often hostile - conduct is not considered uncivil or it's "not actionable". 4) The excessively vilifying application of the most frowned-upon rules such as COI, socking. Editors tagged as such are treated the same regardless of the effect of their actions and whether that has caused any damage, which can scale from none to introducing bias to many articles
for
years.
Currently, there is no effort to mitigate these issues, to improve the policies and community practices. It's also a problem that while the "biting newbies" and "civility" policies are very well written, these are almost never applied and definitely not in the protection of newcomers.
By
that I don't mean these should always result in sanctions, but that the community - and primarily who get involved with handling disputes -
should
take these seriously, approach with a neutral mindset and remind the editors about our policies, but that almost never happens and such complaints are either ignored or blindly decided in favor of the editor with more supporters, enabling the abuse of newcomers.
Tl;dr: newcomers don't enjoy the safety net created by editors who know and care for each other and the community processes are not set up to create a welcoming and/or safe environment, this purpose is not
manifested
in any kind of endeavors or practices. If the WMF and the movement take
the
Mid-Term target of a welcoming environment seriously, that's a difficult, long-term target that will take a lot of effort.
Aron (Demian) _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hard to tell anything without the relevant link(s).
Vito
Il giorno mer 19 feb 2020 alle ore 22:35 Andy Mabbett < andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk> ha scritto:
I have just come across a case on en.Wikipedia where the daughter of an article subject added details of his funeral (his death in 1984,w as already recorded) and his view about an indent in his life.
Her six sequential edits - her first and only contribution to Wikipedia - totalled 1254 characters, and were conducted over the space of 30 minutes. They were no the best quality, lacking sources, but were benign, and exactly what one might expect an untutored novice to do as a first change.
As well as being reverted, she now has three templates on her talk page; two warning her of a CoI, and sandwiching one notifying her of a discussion about her on the COI noticeboard. These total 4094 characters or 665 words.
How do other projects deal with such cases?
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 20:36, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hard to tell anything without the relevant link(s).
For you, maybe. Others have already given helpful replies.
My question was generic, and not about the specific case I gave as an example.
I chose not to post links to to the example, both in order to avoid a pile-on, and to avoid us being distracted by the minutiae of the incident concerned.
Its an interest aspect of speaking generically to describe any issue that the demand for links turns a discussion from general to specific that says. Firstly I dont trust you, I'm not assuming good faith in your reason for starting the discussion. Then secondly it focus the discussion to one point ignoring the bigger picture issues, lets not look too deep we because we'll find some cultural/community failing we cant handle that.
On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 at 16:59, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 20:36, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hard to tell anything without the relevant link(s).
For you, maybe. Others have already given helpful replies.
My question was generic, and not about the specific case I gave as an example.
I chose not to post links to to the example, both in order to avoid a pile-on, and to avoid us being distracted by the minutiae of the incident concerned.
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Not really, drawing practical advices/lessons (e.g. "differentiate among kinds of COIs") is the only sensible path towards solving issues. "Let's be kind" is close to a tautology.
Vito
Il giorno mer 26 feb 2020 alle ore 09:59 Andy Mabbett < andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk> ha scritto:
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 20:36, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hard to tell anything without the relevant link(s).
For you, maybe. Others have already given helpful replies.
My question was generic, and not about the specific case I gave as an example.
I chose not to post links to to the example, both in order to avoid a pile-on, and to avoid us being distracted by the minutiae of the incident concerned.
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Thanks for mentioning the WMF Growth team [1], Pine. This is a really interesting thread that has touched on much of what the team has been working on alongside the Czech, Korean, Arabic, and Vietnamese Wikipedia communities (and with the advice of people from many different communities along the way).
We've tried to base our approach in research on newcomers, which taught us that newcomers face three main types of challenges: technical, conceptual, and cultural [2]. For instance, the research tells us that the rules of the wiki are hard to learn, and that a negative first interaction can cause a newcomer to leave the wiki and not return -- but that a positive interaction, such as getting advice from a friendly editor, can cause them to stay.
Over the last year and a half, we have experimented on mid-size Wikipedias with features that promote good communication between new and experienced users [3], that help newcomers teach themselves [4], and that give newcomers easy tasks to do [5]. The goal is to build an experience for newcomers that helps them get on a positive track in their first days on the wiki, and want to stick around to join their communities. It's possible that what we've learned and built so far will apply differently to the largest Wikipedias.
I hope that anyone who is interested in newcomers can tell us about their own experiences and ideas on our team's discussion page [6], or on the discussion pages of any of our projects. It's very important to us that the things we build fit in with how communities work today. Over the next year, we're planning to expand the Growth features to more wikis, so we definitely want to talk to people who think the features might be a good fit for their wikis.
To keep informed about the Growth team, please subscribe to our newsletter [7].
[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/New_Editor_Experiences [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Personalized_first_day/Newcomer_homepa... [4] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Focus_on_help_desk [5] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Personalized_first_day/Newcomer_tasks [6] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Growth [7] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Newsletters
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 3:07 AM Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Not really, drawing practical advices/lessons (e.g. "differentiate among kinds of COIs") is the only sensible path towards solving issues. "Let's be kind" is close to a tautology.
Vito
Il giorno mer 26 feb 2020 alle ore 09:59 Andy Mabbett < andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk> ha scritto:
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 20:36, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hard to tell anything without the relevant link(s).
For you, maybe. Others have already given helpful replies.
My question was generic, and not about the specific case I gave as an example.
I chose not to post links to to the example, both in order to avoid a pile-on, and to avoid us being distracted by the minutiae of the incident concerned.
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
As a quick/rough data point I don't frequently edit wikipedia anymore, and when I do I never log in.
About 2/3 edits no further interactions happen. About 10% gets reverted, about 10% of the time I get a warning and the last 10% I get a welcome template.
On Thu, Feb 27, 2020, 15:52 Marshall Miller marshall.h.miller@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for mentioning the WMF Growth team [1], Pine. This is a really interesting thread that has touched on much of what the team has been working on alongside the Czech, Korean, Arabic, and Vietnamese Wikipedia communities (and with the advice of people from many different communities along the way).
We've tried to base our approach in research on newcomers, which taught us that newcomers face three main types of challenges: technical, conceptual, and cultural [2]. For instance, the research tells us that the rules of the wiki are hard to learn, and that a negative first interaction can cause a newcomer to leave the wiki and not return -- but that a positive interaction, such as getting advice from a friendly editor, can cause them to stay.
Over the last year and a half, we have experimented on mid-size Wikipedias with features that promote good communication between new and experienced users [3], that help newcomers teach themselves [4], and that give newcomers easy tasks to do [5]. The goal is to build an experience for newcomers that helps them get on a positive track in their first days on the wiki, and want to stick around to join their communities. It's possible that what we've learned and built so far will apply differently to the largest Wikipedias.
I hope that anyone who is interested in newcomers can tell us about their own experiences and ideas on our team's discussion page [6], or on the discussion pages of any of our projects. It's very important to us that the things we build fit in with how communities work today. Over the next year, we're planning to expand the Growth features to more wikis, so we definitely want to talk to people who think the features might be a good fit for their wikis.
To keep informed about the Growth team, please subscribe to our newsletter [7].
[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/New_Editor_Experiences [3]
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Personalized_first_day/Newcomer_homepa... [4] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Focus_on_help_desk [5] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Personalized_first_day/Newcomer_tasks [6] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Growth [7] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Newsletters
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 3:07 AM Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Not really, drawing practical advices/lessons (e.g. "differentiate among kinds of COIs") is the only sensible path towards solving issues. "Let's be kind" is close to a tautology.
Vito
Il giorno mer 26 feb 2020 alle ore 09:59 Andy Mabbett < andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk> ha scritto:
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 20:36, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hard to tell anything without the relevant link(s).
For you, maybe. Others have already given helpful replies.
My question was generic, and not about the specific case I gave as an example.
I chose not to post links to to the example, both in order to avoid a pile-on, and to avoid us being distracted by the minutiae of the incident concerned.
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- Marshall Miller marshall.h.miller@gmail.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Some established users have the habit of reverting every edit by IPs and newbies in the articles they watch - often with the special reversion tool - no mater the content and value of the edition. That is a very consistent behavior I've been observing over more than one decade at the Wikipedia in Portuguese, and the newbie edit only stays if another established user notices the reversion, and reverts it back. Meaning: One established user has to risk potential conflict with those other established users to reinstate the newbie edition - with the result that many simply staying away from that and leaving the IP/Newbie to its fate.
It's against the community rules, but pretty much nobody seems to care - meaning: it's not really against the will of the community.
The general result is a very poor experience for everyone using IPs; and slightly better (or less bad) for registered newbies, but still quite hostile.
Best, Paulo
Martijn Hoekstra martijnhoekstra@gmail.com escreveu no dia quinta, 27/02/2020 à(s) 16:41:
As a quick/rough data point I don't frequently edit wikipedia anymore, and when I do I never log in.
About 2/3 edits no further interactions happen. About 10% gets reverted, about 10% of the time I get a warning and the last 10% I get a welcome template.
On Thu, Feb 27, 2020, 15:52 Marshall Miller marshall.h.miller@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for mentioning the WMF Growth team [1], Pine. This is a really interesting thread that has touched on much of what the team has been working on alongside the Czech, Korean, Arabic, and Vietnamese Wikipedia communities (and with the advice of people from many different
communities
along the way).
We've tried to base our approach in research on newcomers, which taught
us
that newcomers face three main types of challenges: technical,
conceptual,
and cultural [2]. For instance, the research tells us that the rules of the wiki are hard to learn, and that a negative first interaction can
cause
a newcomer to leave the wiki and not return -- but that a positive interaction, such as getting advice from a friendly editor, can cause
them
to stay.
Over the last year and a half, we have experimented on mid-size
Wikipedias
with features that promote good communication between new and experienced users [3], that help newcomers teach themselves [4], and that give newcomers easy tasks to do [5]. The goal is to build an experience for newcomers that helps them get on a positive track in their first days on the wiki, and want to stick around to join their communities. It's possible that what we've learned and built so far will apply differently
to
the largest Wikipedias.
I hope that anyone who is interested in newcomers can tell us about their own experiences and ideas on our team's discussion page [6], or on the discussion pages of any of our projects. It's very important to us that the things we build fit in with how communities work today. Over the
next
year, we're planning to expand the Growth features to more wikis, so we definitely want to talk to people who think the features might be a good fit for their wikis.
To keep informed about the Growth team, please subscribe to our
newsletter
[7].
[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/New_Editor_Experiences [3]
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Personalized_first_day/Newcomer_homepa...
[4] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Focus_on_help_desk [5]
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Personalized_first_day/Newcomer_tasks
[6] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Growth [7] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Newsletters
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 3:07 AM Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Not really, drawing practical advices/lessons (e.g. "differentiate
among
kinds of COIs") is the only sensible path towards solving issues. "Let's be kind" is close to a tautology.
Vito
Il giorno mer 26 feb 2020 alle ore 09:59 Andy Mabbett < andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk> ha scritto:
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 20:36, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hard to tell anything without the relevant link(s).
For you, maybe. Others have already given helpful replies.
My question was generic, and not about the specific case I gave as an example.
I chose not to post links to to the example, both in order to avoid a pile-on, and to avoid us being distracted by the minutiae of the incident concerned.
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- Marshall Miller marshall.h.miller@gmail.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
We are a small version that welcome all contributions that enhance value. So we do not use coi to say no, we only use coi when people enter biased statements, or get angry when their contributions gets neutralized.
And we do not use templates in those cases, we do not even have ones, we only link to our policy for coi, in a sentence.
But i am fully aware that the challenge for enwp is much different and understand other procedure are used
At the same time i would appreciate if the reality of enwp was not used to say it represent all communities.
Anders (representing svwp)
Den 2020-02-19 kl. 22:34, skrev Andy Mabbett:
I have just come across a case on en.Wikipedia where the daughter of an article subject added details of his funeral (his death in 1984,w as already recorded) and his view about an indent in his life.
Her six sequential edits - her first and only contribution to Wikipedia - totalled 1254 characters, and were conducted over the space of 30 minutes. They were no the best quality, lacking sources, but were benign, and exactly what one might expect an untutored novice to do as a first change.
As well as being reverted, she now has three templates on her talk page; two warning her of a CoI, and sandwiching one notifying her of a discussion about her on the COI noticeboard. These total 4094 characters or 665 words.
How do other projects deal with such cases?
We don't, at least not at community level. At most, we fight for individual cases which are worth it (e.g. PR people that seem willing to learn). This got us some half-decent articles about companies.
Pe miercuri, 19 februarie 2020, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk a scris:
I have just come across a case on en.Wikipedia where the daughter of an article subject added details of his funeral (his death in 1984,w as already recorded) and his view about an indent in his life.
Her six sequential edits - her first and only contribution to Wikipedia - totalled 1254 characters, and were conducted over the space of 30 minutes. They were no the best quality, lacking sources, but were benign, and exactly what one might expect an untutored novice to do as a first change.
As well as being reverted, she now has three templates on her talk page; two warning her of a CoI, and sandwiching one notifying her of a discussion about her on the COI noticeboard. These total 4094 characters or 665 words.
How do other projects deal with such cases?
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Perhaps of interest to participants in this discussion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-03-01/Opinio..., titled "Wikipedia is another country", by User:Gog the Mild (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gog_the_Mild).
I'll quote two paragraph of this essay here. (For the license for this text, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_Creative_Commons_Attribution....)
"Which brings me back to psychological preparedness. I was not accustomed to being the new member of an established group and the slow kid at the back of the class at the same time. Relying on the charity of others to metaphorically tie my shoelaces. It grated. This was entirely my own, fairly reasonable (I think), issue. Nor was I prepared for the casual offhandedness which is fairly common. Recently I suffered a mass revert with the edit summary "Learn some intellectual property law". This bluntness rankled. It was my issue rather than the reverting editor's, but that didn't help reduce the rankle. Since discovering MilHist I have stumbled around in this small corner of Wikipedia, occasionally bumping into helpful tools which I endeavour to clutch close.
"The near complete lack of usable guides – IMO – to the basics is heavily compensated by the, usually, enormous willingness of complete strangers to spend time and effort correcting my idiocies, reducing my ignorance and remembering that they too were newbies once. Members of the Military History Project have collegially made the project a comfortable place to work in such a natural, even graceful, way that what they have achieved seems normal."
My guess is that many good novice users quit after encountering interpersonal, procedural, or technical problems which they don't know how to resolve, or exceed their tolerances. I think that English Wikipedia's Teahouse has been successful with addressing some of these issues, but as Gog the Mild notes, we could do more.
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org