[Foundation-l] Lack of research on Wikipedia

Tue Aug 25 00:13:55 UTC 2009

What is most remarkable in many ways is that there has been as much progress
on quality and on meeting user needs despite a lack of measurements
connected with those.  Perhaps that it attributable to the contributor
population being a reasonably good match with the user population so that
honest contributor introspection was almost as good as a usability study. As
WMF pushes on it seems unlikely that the same fortunate conditions will
continue. We have higher barriers to contribution by newer contributors and
a richer mix of persons of academic orientation who seem to treat the
projects as platforms for ersatz scholarly publication. In any event such
folks are not a good model for the user base that the projects serve.
Without some devices to get a greater focus on user needs, I fear a steady
narrowing and deadening of the projects.

The absence of information about how well the projects are serving user
needs (those that we would want to serve) is part of what has led to the
obsession with the crudest of measures about the product.

IOW, you may not find so much information as you might want about how good a
job the projects are doing.

And therein may lie some of your recommendations.

On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 6:12 PM, Fowler, John <john.fowler at bridgespan.org>wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I stumbled across this thread when I was browsing through some past
> foundation-l posts. My name is John Fowler, and I'm with the Bridgespan
> Group, working with the Wikimedia Foundation during the strategic
> planning process to develop a fact base to inform future work.
>
> We're trying to pull together all available research currently on
> Wikimedia's strategic planning site. You can find these preliminary fact
> bases at http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fact_base. There's good data
> here on article count, number of contributors, quality of articles, and
> the demographics of readers/contributors. This may be of some use to the
> discussion regarding the availability of research on Wikipedia, but any
> additional information would be a huge help--especially given how much
> knowledge seems to be passed back and forth on this mailing list.
>
> Best,
> John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gerard Meijssen [mailto:gerard.meijssen at gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 2:22 PM
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Lack of research on Wikipedia
>
> Hoi,
> I wrote articles on all the fish of the Benelux. I cheered when I was
> done..
> Nobody else did. What we need is to celebrate something that has meaning
> to
> all. Articles do that better then anything I know.
>
> The thing with news is that it needs to be told. That is why I blog for
> instance, how else do I explain that a GLAM is not about getting images
> for
> Wikipedia but that they provide the basis for the credibility of the
> illustrations we use. Compare that to article numbers, there is the
> suspense
> of the numbers rising to this magical number... It is a great show, and
> while it may have limited meaning, it gives a more universal sense of
> accomplishment.
> Thanks,
>        GerardM
>
> 2009/8/20 Ziko van Dijk <zvandijk at googlemail.com>
>
> > Hi Gerard,
> > Indeed, people need news. But they can be produced also with more
> > sence having accomplishments: All mayors of our capital have an
> > article, the 50 most important folk singers, great illustrated
> > articles on the fauna and flora of our region...
> > Kind regards
> > Ziko
> >
> > 2009/8/20 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>:
> > > Hoi,
> > > For some of our smaller projects, the number of articles are the
> only
> > > milestones available. It is necessary to celebrate progress. It is
> > > meaningful when the Swahili Wikipedia becomes the biggest African
> > language
> > > Wikipedia. It is meanigful when you compare it with most of the
> other
> > > African language projects that have no life in them.
> > >
> > > I agree that on many levels the numbers game is of little relevance
> > however
> > > it becomes relevant when there is a need for the celebration of
> progress
> > in
> > > a project. A need to be motivated to go on with the gigantic task
> that is
> > > writing a Wikipedia.
> > > Thanks,
> > >      GerardM
> > >
> > > 2009/8/20 Ziko van Dijk <zvandijk at googlemail.com>
> > >
> > >> I couldn't agree more, Erik. Not paying attention to "milestones"
> is
> > >> the first and best step; Wikipedia:Signpost should start with it.
> > >> Ziko
> > >>
> > >> 2009/8/20 Erik Zachte <erikzachte at infodisiac.com>:
> > >>
> > >> > I concur wholeheartedly. Focusing on rising article counts gave
> us a
> > >> thrill
> > >> > for many years, and now it is difficult to kick the bad habit.
> > >>
> > >> > On a small wikipedia (at least most of them) there is simply not
> > enough
> > >> of a
> > >> > community to drive this semi automated article creation process.
> > >> >
> > >> > I think it would help if we discouraged any bragging on the 4th
> > millionth
> > >> > article in the English Wikipedia at all and downplayed any
> inquiries
> > from
> > >> > the media.
> > >> >
> > >> > _______________________________________________
> > >> > foundation-l mailing list
> > >> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > >> > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Ziko van Dijk
> > >> NL-Silvolde
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> foundation-l mailing list
> > >> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > >> Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Ziko van Dijk
> > NL-Silvolde
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> ___________________NOTICE____________________________
> This electronic mail transmission, including any attachments, contains
> confidential information of Bain & Company, Inc. ("Bain") and/or its
> clients.  It is intended only for the person(s) named, and the information
> in such e-mail shall only be used by the person(s) named for the purpose
> intended and for no other purpose.  Any use, distribution, copying or
> disclosure by any other persons, or by the person(s) named but for purposes
> other than the intended purpose, is strictly prohibited.  If you received
> this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and
> then destroy this e-mail.  Opinions, conclusions and other information in
> this message that do not relate to the official business of Bain shall be
> understood to be neither given nor endorsed by Bain.  When addressed to Bain
> clients, any information contained in this e-mail shall be subject to the
> terms and conditions in the applicable client contract.
> _______________________________________
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

-- 
Dennis C. During

Cynolatry is tolerant so long as the dog is not denied an equal divinity
with the deities of other faiths. - Ambrose Bierce

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cynolatry