Ideas for newbie recruitment

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
26 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Ideas for newbie recruitment

David Gerard-2
I’ve been into Wikipedia for several years, and all my friends know
this. I *still* find myself having to explain to them in small words
that that “edit” link really does include them fixing typos when they
see one.

So my suggestion: tiny tiny steps like this: things people can do that
have a strong probability of sticking.

Anyone else got ideas based on their (admittedly anecdotal) experience?

[inspired by Oliver Keyes' blog post: http://quominus.org/archives/524 ]


- d.

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

Re: Ideas for newbie recruitment

Federico Leva (Nemo)
David Gerard, 31/10/2011 12:29:

> I’ve been into Wikipedia for several years, and all my friends know
> this. I *still* find myself having to explain to them in small words
> that that “edit” link really does include them fixing typos when they
> see one.
>
> So my suggestion: tiny tiny steps like this: things people can do that
> have a strong probability of sticking.
>
> Anyone else got ideas based on their (admittedly anecdotal) experience?
>
> [inspired by Oliver Keyes' blog post: http://quominus.org/archives/524 ]

What's the impact of changes like
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Tagline&diff=20130615&oldid=17050524 
?
(Probably minimal, readers don't actually read our invitations to edit
anyway, usually.)

Nemo

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

Re: Ideas for newbie recruitment

David Gerard-2
On 31 October 2011 11:55, Federico Leva (Nemo) <[hidden email]> wrote:

> What's the impact of changes like
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Tagline&diff=20130615&oldid=17050524
> ?
> (Probably minimal, readers don't actually read our invitations to edit
> anyway, usually.)


Do we have knowledge of anyone actually starting to edit because of this?


- d.

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

Re: Ideas for newbie recruitment

Federico Leva (Nemo)
David Gerard, 31/10/2011 12:59:
> On 31 October 2011 11:55, Federico Leva (Nemo)  wrote:
>
>> What's the impact of changes like
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Tagline&diff=20130615&oldid=17050524
>> ?
>> (Probably minimal, readers don't actually read our invitations to edit
>> anyway, usually.)
>
> Do we have knowledge of anyone actually starting to edit because of this?

I don't remember if we ever asked, in our general surveys, how and when
contributors discovered that they /could/ edit. But perhaps after
they've edited it's too late becauser they've already fallen in the
category "I don't remember, I've always known it".

Nemo

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

Re: Ideas for newbie recruitment

Oliver Keyes-3
Not sure about that specific change, but one illustration might be the
Article Feedback Tool, which contains a "you know you can edit, right?"
thing. Off the top of my head I think 17.4 percent of the 30-40,000 people
who use it per day attempt to edit as a result of that inducement.
Admittedly only 2 percent of them *succeed*, but it's not a lack of
motivation, methinks.

On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
<[hidden email]>wrote:

> David Gerard, 31/10/2011 12:59:
> > On 31 October 2011 11:55, Federico Leva (Nemo)  wrote:
> >
> >> What's the impact of changes like
> >>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Tagline&diff=20130615&oldid=17050524
> >> ?
> >> (Probably minimal, readers don't actually read our invitations to edit
> >> anyway, usually.)
> >
> > Do we have knowledge of anyone actually starting to edit because of this?
>
> I don't remember if we ever asked, in our general surveys, how and when
> contributors discovered that they /could/ edit. But perhaps after
> they've edited it's too late becauser they've already fallen in the
> category "I don't remember, I've always known it".
>
> Nemo
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ideas for newbie recruitment

David Gerard-2
On 31 October 2011 12:30, Oliver Keyes <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Not sure about that specific change, but one illustration might be the
> Article Feedback Tool, which contains a "you know you can edit, right?"
> thing. Off the top of my head I think 17.4 percent of the 30-40,000 people
> who use it per day attempt to edit as a result of that inducement.
> Admittedly only 2 percent of them *succeed*, but it's not a lack of
> motivation, methinks.


What's the definition of "succeed" there - they save an edit with a change?

Is that 2% of the 17.4%, or 2% of those giving feedback?

I wonder if there's a way to detect a failure to edit and ask what went wrong.


- d.

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

Re: Ideas for newbie recruitment

Oliver Keyes-4
2% of the 17, I believe (don't quote me on that), and yeah, saving an edit
is the metric. I think we could probably improve things by providing
guidance on markup or something; I imagine for the other 14.6 percent the
process goes something along the lines of "oh, it says I can make the
changes myself, lets do thaWAUGH, WHAT IN CTHULU'S NAME DOES ALL THIS TEXT
MEAN"

On 31 October 2011 12:39, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 31 October 2011 12:30, Oliver Keyes <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Not sure about that specific change, but one illustration might be the
> > Article Feedback Tool, which contains a "you know you can edit, right?"
> > thing. Off the top of my head I think 17.4 percent of the 30-40,000
> people
> > who use it per day attempt to edit as a result of that inducement.
> > Admittedly only 2 percent of them *succeed*, but it's not a lack of
> > motivation, methinks.
>
>
> What's the definition of "succeed" there - they save an edit with a change?
>
> Is that 2% of the 17.4%, or 2% of those giving feedback?
>
> I wonder if there's a way to detect a failure to edit and ask what went
> wrong.
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



--
Oliver Keyes
Community Liason, Product Development
Wikimedia Foundation
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ideas for newbie recruitment

David Gerard-2
On 31 October 2011 13:01, Oliver Keyes <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I imagine for the other 14.6 percent the
> process goes something along the lines of "oh, it says I can make the
> changes myself, lets do thaWAUGH, WHAT IN CTHULU'S NAME DOES ALL THIS TEXT
> MEAN"


I've been editing nearly 8 years and I get that reaction ... here's to
usable WYSIWYG!


- d.

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

Re: Ideas for newbie recruitment

Svip
In reply to this post by Federico Leva (Nemo)
On 31 October 2011 12:55, Federico Leva (Nemo) <[hidden email]> wrote:

> What's the impact of changes like
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Tagline&diff=20130615&oldid=17050524
> ?

Thank you for that, that was hilarious to read through all those reversions.

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

Re: Ideas for newbie recruitment

Hubert-17
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2
hi David, what you wrote fits exactly my experience!

Today, my opinion is, that we must focus our efforts on a small portion
of Internet users. It is not that WE just do something very great,
everyone is doing something! In very different ways. Maybe even Facebook
users are doing something useful, but I can not judge.

In Austria, with our heritäge cultural monuments-project we started
different approach to animate new and old user. This project started in
the very beginning with maybe 5-6 active users and is now being carried
out with 220 Wikipedians only in Austria. With varying intensity, but
that's normal. We won estimated 30-50 new Wikipedians, also many who
have been inactive for quite some time.

Crucial was, that we started with a clear communication structure with
newsletter and a portal page from the very beginning. And personal meetings.

And what I found most important,  was the effort to welcome the
contribution of EVERY new wikipedian to welcome his/her contribution
accordingly. Saying: Thank You for your contribution! No automated
greetings with an hello-template, but a very personal one. Maybe
WikiLove as its best, but very, very consequently.

In the course of this project, 2,400 articles (lists) are created and
edited with a total of 36,000 listed properties. These lists
are directly connected to another 4000-5000 other articles and about
20,000 images.
At this time, we realised with this particular project only one third -
maybe just ten percent - what we have set ourselves as a target. This
means that we still have years to work on it. It is difficult to
estimate how many new articles we will still get from this project in
the future.

This project culminated in September wiht the WLM-project in which
Austria has achieved a very excellent result, getting 12.500 pictures.
And another 20 to 30 new user. Some of them prefer to work without
registration. I don´t like it, but I have to accept it.

Our policy was: The best, the most significant, the most important
contribution is the edit of an new user.

I think that every single project requires a communications manager who
is also directly familiar with the project. Part of this communication
efforts may also need the support of newcomers.

The mentor program is, in my view, too inflexible and too static. And
also too impersonal. Very few people will accept an request of
prerequisite tutoring.

The best of all: During the whole period we had no conflicts between us
and no article-vandalism within this thematic area.

h.

Am 31.10.2011 12:29, schrieb David Gerard:

> I’ve been into Wikipedia for several years, and all my friends know
> this. I *still* find myself having to explain to them in small words
> that that “edit” link really does include them fixing typos when they
> see one.
>
> So my suggestion: tiny tiny steps like this: things people can do that
> have a strong probability of sticking.
>
> Anyone else got ideas based on their (admittedly anecdotal) experience?
>
> [inspired by Oliver Keyes' blog post: http://quominus.org/archives/524 ]
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

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

Re: Ideas for newbie recruitment

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 3:06 PM, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 31 October 2011 13:01, Oliver Keyes <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I imagine for the other 14.6 percent the
>> process goes something along the lines of "oh, it says I can make the
>> changes myself, lets do thaWAUGH, WHAT IN CTHULU'S NAME DOES ALL THIS TEXT
>> MEAN"
>
>
> I've been editing nearly 8 years and I get that reaction ... here's to
> usable WYSIWYG!
>
>


Purely aside from the clutter effect of all those tags, particularly
the references syntax is remarkably opaque. I would imagine a huge
part of non-stickyness of edits and the
subsequent demoralisation, stems from the steep learing curve for
citing sources, Personally I have added a few refences, and each time
had to pore with considerabe expense of time
over the relevant help and policy pages. It really is hard to remember
how the syntax works.
Would it be overwhelmingly hard to program a pop-up dialogue which
would first ask which type of source the editor is citing from, which
would lead to a form with labeled textboxes for the
various elements of a reference citation with an asterisk beside the
elements considered vital. My guess is that quite a few of the
elements of such are already in the code.


--
--
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]

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

Re: Ideas for newbie recruitment

Erik Moeller-4
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Would it be overwhelmingly hard to program a pop-up dialogue which
> would first ask which type of source the editor is citing from, which
> would lead to a form with labeled textboxes for the
> various elements of a reference citation with an asterisk beside the
> elements considered vital. My guess is that quite a few of the
> elements of such are already in the code.

A lot of this already exists in the cite toolbar on the English Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cite_toolbar_2.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Citing_sources_tutorial,_part_2.ogv

It's very en.wp specific (because the templates are), and the
usability is still a bit poor. It's one of those low-hanging fruit
things where a little bit of effort could go a long way.

--
Erik Möller
VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

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

Re: Ideas for newbie recruitment

Mateus Nobre
In reply to this post by Jussi-Ville Heiskanen

Agree with David.

We ask for sources everywhere, every place of Wikipedia have ''Cite your Sources''. How could a newbie know how to quote a reference in: <Ref>{{cite web |url= |title= |author= |date= |work= |publisher= |accessdate= }}</ref> ?

And then a newbie get out of the 70% who doesn't saves (funny, it's 70% of waiver and we still have infinite vandalism...) and finally, finally, saves, some pseudo-user (a bot disguised as a user, reverting vandalisms and sending automatic messages 24/7) reverts the newbie cause he doesn't put a source, the newbie gives up. At his second day he have new messages saying ''You didn't put the source. Put a source or I'll revert you againd and again.'' -so, he: ''How could I do that?'' - and the user: easy: ''<Ref>{{cite web |url= |title= |author= |date= |work= |publisher= |accessdate= }}</ref>''

True story.

Something have to change about the sources. I learned put sources after one week trying to learn and not miss the code.

If the sources are so important to Wikipedia, this has to be easier to newbies.

_____________________
MateusNobre
Wikimedia Brasil - MetalBrasil on Wikimedia projects
(+55) 85 88393509
              30440865


> Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 04:14:28 +0200
> From: [hidden email]
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Ideas for newbie recruitment
>
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 3:06 PM, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On 31 October 2011 13:01, Oliver Keyes <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >> I imagine for the other 14.6 percent the
> >> process goes something along the lines of "oh, it says I can make the
> >> changes myself, lets do thaWAUGH, WHAT IN CTHULU'S NAME DOES ALL THIS TEXT
> >> MEAN"
> >
> >
> > I've been editing nearly 8 years and I get that reaction ... here's to
> > usable WYSIWYG!
> >
> >
>
>
> Purely aside from the clutter effect of all those tags, particularly
> the references syntax is remarkably opaque. I would imagine a huge
> part of non-stickyness of edits and the
> subsequent demoralisation, stems from the steep learing curve for
> citing sources, Personally I have added a few refences, and each time
> had to pore with considerabe expense of time
> over the relevant help and policy pages. It really is hard to remember
> how the syntax works.
> Would it be overwhelmingly hard to program a pop-up dialogue which
> would first ask which type of source the editor is citing from, which
> would lead to a form with labeled textboxes for the
> various elements of a reference citation with an asterisk beside the
> elements considered vital. My guess is that quite a few of the
> elements of such are already in the code.
>
>
> --
> --
> Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
     
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ideas for newbie recruitment

Béria Lima
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/cite4wiki/ (in wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Cite4Wiki )

right click and paste in the article. Easier than that can't be ;)
_____
*Béria Lima*
<http://wikimedia.pt/>(351) 925 171 484

*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter
livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que
estamos a fazer <http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Nossos_projetos>.*


On 1 November 2011 23:39, Mateus Nobre <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Agree with David.
>
> We ask for sources everywhere, every place of Wikipedia have ''Cite your
> Sources''. How could a newbie know how to quote a reference in: <Ref>{{cite
> web |url= |title= |author= |date= |work= |publisher= |accessdate= }}</ref> ?
>
> And then a newbie get out of the 70% who doesn't saves (funny, it's 70% of
> waiver and we still have infinite vandalism...) and finally, finally,
> saves, some pseudo-user (a bot disguised as a user, reverting vandalisms
> and sending automatic messages 24/7) reverts the newbie cause he doesn't
> put a source, the newbie gives up. At his second day he have new messages
> saying ''You didn't put the source. Put a source or I'll revert you againd
> and again.'' -so, he: ''How could I do that?'' - and the user: easy:
> ''<Ref>{{cite web |url= |title= |author= |date= |work= |publisher=
> |accessdate= }}</ref>''
>
> True story.
>
> Something have to change about the sources. I learned put sources after
> one week trying to learn and not miss the code.
>
> If the sources are so important to Wikipedia, this has to be easier to
> newbies.
>
> _____________________
> MateusNobre
> Wikimedia Brasil - MetalBrasil on Wikimedia projects
> (+55) 85 88393509
>              30440865
>
>
> > Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 04:14:28 +0200
> > From: [hidden email]
> > To: [hidden email]
> > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Ideas for newbie recruitment
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 3:06 PM, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > On 31 October 2011 13:01, Oliver Keyes <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I imagine for the other 14.6 percent the
> > >> process goes something along the lines of "oh, it says I can make the
> > >> changes myself, lets do thaWAUGH, WHAT IN CTHULU'S NAME DOES ALL THIS
> TEXT
> > >> MEAN"
> > >
> > >
> > > I've been editing nearly 8 years and I get that reaction ... here's to
> > > usable WYSIWYG!
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > Purely aside from the clutter effect of all those tags, particularly
> > the references syntax is remarkably opaque. I would imagine a huge
> > part of non-stickyness of edits and the
> > subsequent demoralisation, stems from the steep learing curve for
> > citing sources, Personally I have added a few refences, and each time
> > had to pore with considerabe expense of time
> > over the relevant help and policy pages. It really is hard to remember
> > how the syntax works.
> > Would it be overwhelmingly hard to program a pop-up dialogue which
> > would first ask which type of source the editor is citing from, which
> > would lead to a form with labeled textboxes for the
> > various elements of a reference citation with an asterisk beside the
> > elements considered vital. My guess is that quite a few of the
> > elements of such are already in the code.
> >
> >
> > --
> > --
> > Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ideas for newbie recruitment

David Gerard-2
In reply to this post by Mateus Nobre
On 1 November 2011 23:39, Mateus Nobre <[hidden email]> wrote:

> If the sources are so important to Wikipedia, this has to be easier to newbies.


The essential problem is that the Wikipedia community is newbie-hostile.

Not actively - mostly - but passively. They view newbies as trouble and work.

Hence all the pushes back against newbies - trying to further restrict
page creation and so forth, the problem with citations, defending the
impossible markup, open hostility on Special:Newpages ...

So how to make the other side of the newbie experience not suck for
the incumbents?


- d.

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

Re: Ideas for newbie recruitment

Mateus Nobre

This hostility is being reflected in the drop at the number of the editors.I agree with the ''automatic-message theory''. None likes automatic messages. In my view, it should be reserved for vandals.
Newbies needs a special priority. Something like: ''Hi, thanks for your edition! We hope you become part of our team. If you need anything, just talk to us''.
It's not hard to do, is it?

_____________________
MateusNobre
MetalBrasil on Wikimedia projects
(+55) 85 88393509
              30440865


> Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 23:45:33 +0000
> From: [hidden email]
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Ideas for newbie recruitment
>
> On 1 November 2011 23:39, Mateus Nobre <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > If the sources are so important to Wikipedia, this has to be easier to newbies.
>
>
> The essential problem is that the Wikipedia community is newbie-hostile.
>
> Not actively - mostly - but passively. They view newbies as trouble and work.
>
> Hence all the pushes back against newbies - trying to further restrict
> page creation and so forth, the problem with citations, defending the
> impossible markup, open hostility on Special:Newpages ...
>
> So how to make the other side of the newbie experience not suck for
> the incumbents?
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
     
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ideas for newbie recruitment

Marco Chiesa
In reply to this post by Béria Lima
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Béria Lima <[hidden email]> wrote:
> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/cite4wiki/ (in wiki:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Cite4Wiki )
>
> right click and paste in the article. Easier than that can't be ;)

There are a lot of tools available to make the life of a Wiki editor
simple. The problem is that by the time you come into them, you have
already learned how to do things, where to find templates. I think we
need to develop a kind of wizard similar to the one used in Commons.
For example something like:
*What is the article about? with specific instructions for some of the
commonest categories (biographies, films, geographic places
*Write the text
*Wikify it
*Add references. Is it a book? A website? The templates are
straightforward to fill but difficult to find
*Preview and proofread
*Save it

Cruccone

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

Re: Ideas for newbie recruitment

Mateus Nobre
The learning of the new editors have to be more instinctive and less
bureaucratic. Seriously, who here, at the first time editing Wikipedia, read
the policy BEFORE editing a lot? None. Everyone just reads the rules a long
time after the beggining of Wikipedian life.

I think a system like used in Commons too, but now about editing Wikipedia.
Could be used for IPs and accounts with less than 100 editions, for example,
and concealable, of course.
A system whick teach to newbies about the syntax  ( that's the most
complicated thin to teach newbies: [[ ]], {{ }} and of course,
<Ref>{{cite web |url= |title= |author= |date= |work= |publisher=
|accessdate= }}</ref>)

It has to be discussed. It would be a important system, essential nowadays.


-----Mensagem Original-----
From: Marco Chiesa
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 6:02 AM
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Ideas for newbie recruitment

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Béria Lima <[hidden email]> wrote:
> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/cite4wiki/ (in wiki:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Cite4Wiki )
>
> right click and paste in the article. Easier than that can't be ;)

There are a lot of tools available to make the life of a Wiki editor
simple. The problem is that by the time you come into them, you have
already learned how to do things, where to find templates. I think we
need to develop a kind of wizard similar to the one used in Commons.
For example something like:
*What is the article about? with specific instructions for some of the
commonest categories (biographies, films, geographic places
*Write the text
*Wikify it
*Add references. Is it a book? A website? The templates are
straightforward to fill but difficult to find
*Preview and proofread
*Save it

Cruccone

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


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

Re: Ideas for newbie recruitment

Béria Lima
>
> *Seriously, who here, at the first time editing Wikipedia, read the
> policy BEFORE editing a lot?
> *


/me raise her hand! o/

I read all the links in this {{welcome}} template BEFORE edit:
http://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Predefini%C3%A7%C3%A3o:Bem-vindo%28a%29&oldid=6812887(version
in use whe i was a newbie)
_____
*Béria Lima*
<http://wikimedia.pt/>(351) 925 171 484

*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter
livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que
estamos a fazer <http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Nossos_projetos>.*


On 2 November 2011 13:51, Mateus Nobre <[hidden email]> wrote:

> The learning of the new editors have to be more instinctive and less
> bureaucratic. Seriously, who here, at the first time editing Wikipedia,
> read
> the policy BEFORE editing a lot? None. Everyone just reads the rules a long
> time after the beggining of Wikipedian life.
>
> I think a system like used in Commons too, but now about editing Wikipedia.
> Could be used for IPs and accounts with less than 100 editions, for
> example,
> and concealable, of course.
> A system whick teach to newbies about the syntax  ( that's the most
> complicated thin to teach newbies: [[ ]], {{ }} and of course,
> <Ref>{{cite web |url= |title= |author= |date= |work= |publisher=
> |accessdate= }}</ref>)
>
> It has to be discussed. It would be a important system, essential nowadays.
>
>
> -----Mensagem Original-----
> From: Marco Chiesa
> Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 6:02 AM
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Ideas for newbie recruitment
>
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Béria Lima <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/cite4wiki/ (in wiki:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Cite4Wiki )
> >
> > right click and paste in the article. Easier than that can't be ;)
>
> There are a lot of tools available to make the life of a Wiki editor
> simple. The problem is that by the time you come into them, you have
> already learned how to do things, where to find templates. I think we
> need to develop a kind of wizard similar to the one used in Commons.
> For example something like:
> *What is the article about? with specific instructions for some of the
> commonest categories (biographies, films, geographic places
> *Write the text
> *Wikify it
> *Add references. Is it a book? A website? The templates are
> straightforward to fill but difficult to find
> *Preview and proofread
> *Save it
>
> Cruccone
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ideas for newbie recruitment

Kim Bruning
In reply to this post by Svip
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 02:08:24PM +0100, Svip wrote:
> On 31 October 2011 12:55, Federico Leva (Nemo) <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > What's the impact of changes like
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Tagline&diff=20130615&oldid=17050524
> > ?
>
> Thank you for that, that was hilarious to read through all those reversions.

Now you understand the true source of wiki-power: A sense of humor, and a keen sense of fun. <grin>

/me almost forgot wikipedia used to be that way. :-)

sincerely,
        Kim ':-)' Bruning



--

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
12