Editor retention (was "Announcement: New editor engagement experiments team!")

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Editor retention (was "Announcement: New editor engagement experiments team!")

ENWP Pine
Responding to MZMcBride's question, "And a bit larger than this, what's an
acceptable cost for keeping new editors around? For example, deleting a new
user's article is probably the easiest way to discourage him or her, but is
the alternative (allowing their spammy page to sit around for a while) an
acceptable cost for the potential benefit?"

First, I think that the new visual editor will help.

Second, I think that the NOTFACEBOOK policy is a bit counterproductive in
its current form. Wikipedia is a collaborative work and I've seen the
NOTFACEBOOK policy pushed in the faces of people who engage in personal
conversation on their talk pages. We want people to develop collaborative
relationships here, right? I don't mean to suggest that people should turn
userpages entirely into personal blogs, but I also think that the statement
"Wikipedians have their own user pages, but they may be used only to present
information relevant to working on the encyclopedia" is overkill and
discourages people from forming friendly collaborative relationships. I
think that we should move in the opposite direction, permitting and possibly
even encouraging people to be social (within reasonable limits) while
working collaboratively on our collective project of Wikipedia.

Pine


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor retention (was "Announcement: New editor engagement experiments team!")

Bod Notbod
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 22:01, En Pine <[hidden email]> wrote:

> think that we should move in the opposite direction, permitting and possibly
> even encouraging people to be social (within reasonable limits) while
> working collaboratively on our collective project of Wikipedia.

I agree. When I was a new editor I got into a friendly chat with an
established Wikipedian. We exchanged a few light-hearted pleasantries
and it did a lot to make me feel welcome in my new environment.

I don't think we should be asking that people keep their talk pages
"on topic" as it were. Indeed I had no idea that we do.

Bodnotbod

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor retention (was "Announcement: New editor engagement experiments team!")

ENWP Pine
In reply to this post by ENWP Pine
>>On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 22:01, En Pine <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> think that we should move in the opposite direction, permitting and
>> possibly
>> even encouraging people to be social (within reasonable limits) while
>> working collaboratively on our collective project of Wikipedia.
>
>I agree. When I was a new editor I got into a friendly chat with an
>established Wikipedian. We exchanged a few light-hearted pleasantries
>and it did a lot to make me feel welcome in my new environment.
>
>I don't think we should be asking that people keep their talk pages
>"on topic" as it were. Indeed I had no idea that we do.
>
>Bodnotbod

I've made an RFC on-wiki.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Proposal_on_.22Wikipedia_is_Not_a_Social_Network.22

Comments, for and against, are welcome there.

Thanks,

Pine


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l