[Wikimedia-l] editor retention initiatives

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

[Wikimedia-l] editor retention initiatives

James Salsman-2
Is there a list somewhere of all currently active Foundation
initiatives for attracting and retaining active editors?  I am only
aware of the one project, "Task Recommendations," to try to encourage
editors who have made a few edits to make more, described starting at
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JbZ1uWoKEg&t=60m20s

I am not worried about pageviews at all, given that the trend is as
constant as it has ever been when mobile users are added in to the
total. Sadly, the greater number of mobile users appears to be harming
active editor numbers beyond their already dismal trend, so it would
be nice to have an idea of exactly how much effort the Foundation is
applying to its only strategic goal which it is not achieved, and has
not ever achieved. I am amazed that so much more effort continues to
be applied to the other goals, all of which have always been met
through to the present. What does this state of affairs say about the
Foundation leadership's ability to prioritize?

Is there any evidence at all that anyone in the Foundation is
interested in any kind of change which would make non-editors more
inclined to edit, or empower editors with social factors which might
provide more time, economic power, or other means to enable them to
edit more?

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] editor retention initiatives

Gerard Meijssen-3
Hoi.
I had a look at the youtube video. Really important in this context is the
presentation by Dario. In it he shows how editing is taking of from mobile
users using tablets. This is a recent shift but the implication as I see it
that working on better tooling for mobile / tablet editors will get us more
results.

If anything, it shows that the work done to get people to edit from mobiles
take its time to have an effect.
Thanks,
      GerardM


On 24 August 2014 03:55, James Salsman <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Is there a list somewhere of all currently active Foundation
> initiatives for attracting and retaining active editors?  I am only
> aware of the one project, "Task Recommendations," to try to encourage
> editors who have made a few edits to make more, described starting at
>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JbZ1uWoKEg&t=60m20s
>
> I am not worried about pageviews at all, given that the trend is as
> constant as it has ever been when mobile users are added in to the
> total. Sadly, the greater number of mobile users appears to be harming
> active editor numbers beyond their already dismal trend, so it would
> be nice to have an idea of exactly how much effort the Foundation is
> applying to its only strategic goal which it is not achieved, and has
> not ever achieved. I am amazed that so much more effort continues to
> be applied to the other goals, all of which have always been met
> through to the present. What does this state of affairs say about the
> Foundation leadership's ability to prioritize?
>
> Is there any evidence at all that anyone in the Foundation is
> interested in any kind of change which would make non-editors more
> inclined to edit, or empower editors with social factors which might
> provide more time, economic power, or other means to enable them to
> edit more?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] editor retention initiatives

Steven Walling
In reply to this post by James Salsman-2
On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 6:55 PM, James Salsman <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Is there a list somewhere of all currently active Foundation
> initiatives for attracting and retaining active editors?  I am only
> aware of the one project, "Task Recommendations," to try to encourage
> editors who have made a few edits to make more, described starting at
>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JbZ1uWoKEg&t=60m20s
>

Task recommendations is one nascent initiative that my team is working
on.[1] We're still in the very early prototyping and testing stages. (BTW,
the whole video segment starts two minutes earlier at about the 58:00
mark.)

Task recommendations is far from the only thing we're doing to attract and
retain active editors. Pretty much the entirety of the features development
roadmap for desktop and mobile is focused on this problem. VisualEditor,
Flow, mobile web and apps work, and more all address this problem from
different angles. You can keep up with what the Foundation is doing by
checking out the monthly engineering reports.[2]


> Is there any evidence at all that anyone in the Foundation is
> interested in any kind of change which would make non-editors more
> inclined to edit, or empower editors with social factors which might
> provide more time, economic power, or other means to enable them to
> edit more?
>

We practically can't and don't take on initiatives that directly try to
provide more free time or money to editors. We can, however, help people do
more with the free time they have, and ask new people to become
contributors. Both of those are things we're tackling. A central goal of
improving the usability of the core editing experience across devices is to
save people time and energy. My team's also trying other things to attract
new community members, such as actually inviting people to sign up.[3]

1. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Task_recommendations
2. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/Report/latest
3.
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Anonymous_editor_acquisition#Invite_users_to_sign_up
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] editor retention initiatives

Tanweer Morshed
Thanks James for addressing such a crucial issue. It is a vital matter but
being discussed far less than other topics, in offline or offline programs,
activities. Among measures fore retaining editors, there were some banners
that appeared on top of articles viewed by new editors or readers. I've
heard that this worked somewhat but didn't continue. In Bangladesh, we're
(Wikipedians/Wikimedians) particularly discussing and talking on how to how
to retain more editors. Many people are becoming new editors but most of
them leave after some days and become inactive. The Task recommendations
seems quite interesting, but I was unaware of it. What about its
implementation? was it ever tested on any Wikipedia and if so, how
successful was it?


On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Steven Walling <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 6:55 PM, James Salsman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Is there a list somewhere of all currently active Foundation
> > initiatives for attracting and retaining active editors?  I am only
> > aware of the one project, "Task Recommendations," to try to encourage
> > editors who have made a few edits to make more, described starting at
> >  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JbZ1uWoKEg&t=60m20s
> >
>
> Task recommendations is one nascent initiative that my team is working
> on.[1] We're still in the very early prototyping and testing stages. (BTW,
> the whole video segment starts two minutes earlier at about the 58:00
> mark.)
>
> Task recommendations is far from the only thing we're doing to attract and
> retain active editors. Pretty much the entirety of the features development
> roadmap for desktop and mobile is focused on this problem. VisualEditor,
> Flow, mobile web and apps work, and more all address this problem from
> different angles. You can keep up with what the Foundation is doing by
> checking out the monthly engineering reports.[2]
>
>
> > Is there any evidence at all that anyone in the Foundation is
> > interested in any kind of change which would make non-editors more
> > inclined to edit, or empower editors with social factors which might
> > provide more time, economic power, or other means to enable them to
> > edit more?
> >
>
> We practically can't and don't take on initiatives that directly try to
> provide more free time or money to editors. We can, however, help people do
> more with the free time they have, and ask new people to become
> contributors. Both of those are things we're tackling. A central goal of
> improving the usability of the core editing experience across devices is to
> save people time and energy. My team's also trying other things to attract
> new community members, such as actually inviting people to sign up.[3]
>
> 1. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Task_recommendations
> 2. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/Report/latest
> 3.
>
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Anonymous_editor_acquisition#Invite_users_to_sign_up
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>



--
Regards -
Tanweer Morshed
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] editor retention initiatives

Ilario Valdelli
In reply to this post by James Salsman-2
Wikimedia ch is doing a big investment in supporting communities.

There are three community liaisons (a third hired recently) to support the
three national languages which are also within the biggest linguistic
communities.

Anyway there is not a unique solution to be adapted easily in user
retention and recruiting because the world is varioius as it is the life.

Regards
Il 24/ago/2014 03:56 "James Salsman" <[hidden email]> ha scritto:

> Is there a list somewhere of all currently active Foundation
> initiatives for attracting and retaining active editors?  I am only
> aware of the one project, "Task Recommendations," to try to encourage
> editors who have made a few edits to make more, described starting at
>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JbZ1uWoKEg&t=60m20s
>
> I am not worried about pageviews at all, given that the trend is as
> constant as it has ever been when mobile users are added in to the
> total. Sadly, the greater number of mobile users appears to be harming
> active editor numbers beyond their already dismal trend, so it would
> be nice to have an idea of exactly how much effort the Foundation is
> applying to its only strategic goal which it is not achieved, and has
> not ever achieved. I am amazed that so much more effort continues to
> be applied to the other goals, all of which have always been met
> through to the present. What does this state of affairs say about the
> Foundation leadership's ability to prioritize?
>
> Is there any evidence at all that anyone in the Foundation is
> interested in any kind of change which would make non-editors more
> inclined to edit, or empower editors with social factors which might
> provide more time, economic power, or other means to enable them to
> edit more?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] editor retention initiatives

David Goodman-2
Perhaps the best way of doing this is the admittedly laborious method of
personally communicating with new editors who seem promising and
encouraging them and offering to help them continue. The key word in this
is "personally". It cannot be effectively done with  wikilove messages ,
and certainly not with anything that looks like a template. Template
welcomes are essentially in the same class as mail or web
"personalized"advertisements.  What works is to show that you actually read
and appreciated what they are doing, to the extent you wanted to write
something specific.


On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Wikimedia ch is doing a big investment in supporting communities.
>
> There are three community liaisons (a third hired recently) to support the
> three national languages which are also within the biggest linguistic
> communities.
>
> Anyway there is not a unique solution to be adapted easily in user
> retention and recruiting because the world is varioius as it is the life.
>
> Regards
> Il 24/ago/2014 03:56 "James Salsman" <[hidden email]> ha scritto:
>
> > Is there a list somewhere of all currently active Foundation
> > initiatives for attracting and retaining active editors?  I am only
> > aware of the one project, "Task Recommendations," to try to encourage
> > editors who have made a few edits to make more, described starting at
> >  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JbZ1uWoKEg&t=60m20s
> >
> > I am not worried about pageviews at all, given that the trend is as
> > constant as it has ever been when mobile users are added in to the
> > total. Sadly, the greater number of mobile users appears to be harming
> > active editor numbers beyond their already dismal trend, so it would
> > be nice to have an idea of exactly how much effort the Foundation is
> > applying to its only strategic goal which it is not achieved, and has
> > not ever achieved. I am amazed that so much more effort continues to
> > be applied to the other goals, all of which have always been met
> > through to the present. What does this state of affairs say about the
> > Foundation leadership's ability to prioritize?
> >
> > Is there any evidence at all that anyone in the Foundation is
> > interested in any kind of change which would make non-editors more
> > inclined to edit, or empower editors with social factors which might
> > provide more time, economic power, or other means to enable them to
> > edit more?
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>



--
David Goodman

DGG at the enWP
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] editor retention initiatives

Liam Wyatt
On 26 August 2014 02:09, David Goodman <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Perhaps the best way of doing this is the admittedly laborious method of
> personally communicating with new editors who seem promising and
> encouraging them and offering to help them continue. The key word in this
> is "personally". It cannot be effectively done with  wikilove messages ,
> and certainly not with anything that looks like a template. Template
> welcomes are essentially in the same class as mail or web
> "personalized"advertisements.  What works is to show that you actually read
> and appreciated what they are doing, to the extent you wanted to write
> something specific.
>
>
I believe there is a software-facilitated way of doing this. You are quite
right that the most effective way of retaining new editors who have good
potential is for them to have some personalised contact and a sense of
community, but you are right that it is time-consuming and it is also
difficult to identify people who are a) new, b) have potential and c) are
people that you personally are interested in helping.

IMO the most likely way to help identify those people is to leverage the
power of the WikiProjects (e.g. Birds, Military History, France,
Mathematics...) to bring new users closer to communities-of-interest
quickly. Erik Moller has spoken about this at Wikimania both this year and
also a couple of years ago and I completely agree with him.

Perhaps when a new user registers they can be asked to name a few things
they're interested in (perhaps prompted from a list). This automagically
connects them to the relevant Wikiproject and somehow tells the members of
that wikiproject that a new user has just registered and expressed an
interest in their topic. Proactive WikiProjects might set up some form of
mentoring scheme, or welcoming committee, or 'tasks that newbies can do'
list. It would be up to the WikiProject to work out the best ways to
coordinate their work with newbies. Rather like the beginning of the
academic year at a university - all the student clubs set up tables to
compete to recruit new members :-)

Yes - this requires software development and therefore needs to be put on a
roadmap, budgeted for etc. etc. But, if we're talking about
editor-retention and *personalised support, *I think it's high time that
the WikiProjects receive some developer attention - in recognition of the
fantastic work that they do in both coordinating the creation of good
quality content and also in building a sense of community among editors
(old and new).

-Liam / Wittylama
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] editor retention initiatives

Jane Darnell
I have seen good results with the "thank" feature. It is easy to use and seems appreciated. When thanked users write to me in response, I have noticed that a specific and neutral "I read your edits about xyz and appreciate them" seems to be more likely to encourage more edits about xyz rather than a suggestion to do something else about xyz (such as joining a wiki project)

Sent from my iPad

On Aug 26, 2014, at 4:59 AM, Liam Wyatt <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 26 August 2014 02:09, David Goodman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Perhaps the best way of doing this is the admittedly laborious method of
>> personally communicating with new editors who seem promising and
>> encouraging them and offering to help them continue. The key word in this
>> is "personally". It cannot be effectively done with  wikilove messages ,
>> and certainly not with anything that looks like a template. Template
>> welcomes are essentially in the same class as mail or web
>> "personalized"advertisements.  What works is to show that you actually read
>> and appreciated what they are doing, to the extent you wanted to write
>> something specific.
>>
>>
> I believe there is a software-facilitated way of doing this. You are quite
> right that the most effective way of retaining new editors who have good
> potential is for them to have some personalised contact and a sense of
> community, but you are right that it is time-consuming and it is also
> difficult to identify people who are a) new, b) have potential and c) are
> people that you personally are interested in helping.
>
> IMO the most likely way to help identify those people is to leverage the
> power of the WikiProjects (e.g. Birds, Military History, France,
> Mathematics...) to bring new users closer to communities-of-interest
> quickly. Erik Moller has spoken about this at Wikimania both this year and
> also a couple of years ago and I completely agree with him.
>
> Perhaps when a new user registers they can be asked to name a few things
> they're interested in (perhaps prompted from a list). This automagically
> connects them to the relevant Wikiproject and somehow tells the members of
> that wikiproject that a new user has just registered and expressed an
> interest in their topic. Proactive WikiProjects might set up some form of
> mentoring scheme, or welcoming committee, or 'tasks that newbies can do'
> list. It would be up to the WikiProject to work out the best ways to
> coordinate their work with newbies. Rather like the beginning of the
> academic year at a university - all the student clubs set up tables to
> compete to recruit new members :-)
>
> Yes - this requires software development and therefore needs to be put on a
> roadmap, budgeted for etc. etc. But, if we're talking about
> editor-retention and *personalised support, *I think it's high time that
> the WikiProjects receive some developer attention - in recognition of the
> fantastic work that they do in both coordinating the creation of good
> quality content and also in building a sense of community among editors
> (old and new).
>
> -Liam / Wittylama
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] editor retention initiatives

Craig Franklin
In reply to this post by David Goodman-2
I agree with this wholeheartedly.  When I think back to when I was new on
Wikipedia, pretty early on I got an honest-to-god personal message from
someone to thank me for correcting a typo (
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lankiveil&diff=5647166&oldid=5629943
).
 It made me feel like this was a community of nice people that I wanted to
collaborate on things with, and was probably instrumental in me sticking
around.

The editor retention problem will not be solved with technological gizmos
and doodads, nor with top-down solutions imposed from above.  It will be
solved with positive human contact and creating a collaborative community
that people actually want to be a part of, rather than one that they put up
with.  Template welcomes and messages that have all the warmth of a form
letter enclosed in a utility bill won't make a lasting improvement in the
long run.  The intention behind things like the "thank" button are great,
but they should be seen as at most an enabler, rather than as the actual
solution to our problems.

Cheers,
Craig





On 26 August 2014 10:09, David Goodman <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Perhaps the best way of doing this is the admittedly laborious method of
> personally communicating with new editors who seem promising and
> encouraging them and offering to help them continue. The key word in this
> is "personally". It cannot be effectively done with  wikilove messages ,
> and certainly not with anything that looks like a template. Template
> welcomes are essentially in the same class as mail or web
> "personalized"advertisements.  What works is to show that you actually read
> and appreciated what they are doing, to the extent you wanted to write
> something specific.
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Wikimedia ch is doing a big investment in supporting communities.
> >
> > There are three community liaisons (a third hired recently) to support
> the
> > three national languages which are also within the biggest linguistic
> > communities.
> >
> > Anyway there is not a unique solution to be adapted easily in user
> > retention and recruiting because the world is varioius as it is the life.
> >
> > Regards
> > Il 24/ago/2014 03:56 "James Salsman" <[hidden email]> ha scritto:
> >
> > > Is there a list somewhere of all currently active Foundation
> > > initiatives for attracting and retaining active editors?  I am only
> > > aware of the one project, "Task Recommendations," to try to encourage
> > > editors who have made a few edits to make more, described starting at
> > >  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JbZ1uWoKEg&t=60m20s
> > >
> > > I am not worried about pageviews at all, given that the trend is as
> > > constant as it has ever been when mobile users are added in to the
> > > total. Sadly, the greater number of mobile users appears to be harming
> > > active editor numbers beyond their already dismal trend, so it would
> > > be nice to have an idea of exactly how much effort the Foundation is
> > > applying to its only strategic goal which it is not achieved, and has
> > > not ever achieved. I am amazed that so much more effort continues to
> > > be applied to the other goals, all of which have always been met
> > > through to the present. What does this state of affairs say about the
> > > Foundation leadership's ability to prioritize?
> > >
> > > Is there any evidence at all that anyone in the Foundation is
> > > interested in any kind of change which would make non-editors more
> > > inclined to edit, or empower editors with social factors which might
> > > provide more time, economic power, or other means to enable them to
> > > edit more?
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> David Goodman
>
> DGG at the enWP
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] editor retention initiatives

David Gerard-2
This is why the "thanks" mechanism needs to work for IP edits too.

(I submit that the hazard that we might accidentally be nice to
someone we didn't mean to is not a sufficient threat to block this.)

On 26 August 2014 11:18, Craig Franklin <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I agree with this wholeheartedly.  When I think back to when I was new on
> Wikipedia, pretty early on I got an honest-to-god personal message from
> someone to thank me for correcting a typo (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lankiveil&diff=5647166&oldid=5629943
> ).
>  It made me feel like this was a community of nice people that I wanted to
> collaborate on things with, and was probably instrumental in me sticking
> around.
>
> The editor retention problem will not be solved with technological gizmos
> and doodads, nor with top-down solutions imposed from above.  It will be
> solved with positive human contact and creating a collaborative community
> that people actually want to be a part of, rather than one that they put up
> with.  Template welcomes and messages that have all the warmth of a form
> letter enclosed in a utility bill won't make a lasting improvement in the
> long run.  The intention behind things like the "thank" button are great,
> but they should be seen as at most an enabler, rather than as the actual
> solution to our problems.
>
> Cheers,
> Craig
>
>
>
>
>
> On 26 August 2014 10:09, David Goodman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Perhaps the best way of doing this is the admittedly laborious method of
>> personally communicating with new editors who seem promising and
>> encouraging them and offering to help them continue. The key word in this
>> is "personally". It cannot be effectively done with  wikilove messages ,
>> and certainly not with anything that looks like a template. Template
>> welcomes are essentially in the same class as mail or web
>> "personalized"advertisements.  What works is to show that you actually read
>> and appreciated what they are doing, to the extent you wanted to write
>> something specific.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Wikimedia ch is doing a big investment in supporting communities.
>> >
>> > There are three community liaisons (a third hired recently) to support
>> the
>> > three national languages which are also within the biggest linguistic
>> > communities.
>> >
>> > Anyway there is not a unique solution to be adapted easily in user
>> > retention and recruiting because the world is varioius as it is the life.
>> >
>> > Regards
>> > Il 24/ago/2014 03:56 "James Salsman" <[hidden email]> ha scritto:
>> >
>> > > Is there a list somewhere of all currently active Foundation
>> > > initiatives for attracting and retaining active editors?  I am only
>> > > aware of the one project, "Task Recommendations," to try to encourage
>> > > editors who have made a few edits to make more, described starting at
>> > >  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JbZ1uWoKEg&t=60m20s
>> > >
>> > > I am not worried about pageviews at all, given that the trend is as
>> > > constant as it has ever been when mobile users are added in to the
>> > > total. Sadly, the greater number of mobile users appears to be harming
>> > > active editor numbers beyond their already dismal trend, so it would
>> > > be nice to have an idea of exactly how much effort the Foundation is
>> > > applying to its only strategic goal which it is not achieved, and has
>> > > not ever achieved. I am amazed that so much more effort continues to
>> > > be applied to the other goals, all of which have always been met
>> > > through to the present. What does this state of affairs say about the
>> > > Foundation leadership's ability to prioritize?
>> > >
>> > > Is there any evidence at all that anyone in the Foundation is
>> > > interested in any kind of change which would make non-editors more
>> > > inclined to edit, or empower editors with social factors which might
>> > > provide more time, economic power, or other means to enable them to
>> > > edit more?
>> > >
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> > > [hidden email]
>> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> > [hidden email]
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> David Goodman
>>
>> DGG at the enWP
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] editor retention initiatives

Anders Wennersten-2
In reply to this post by Craig Franklin
I agree with Craig

The Thank function is not only good to give to new editors but also as a
measurement to what action is appreciated by new beginners

I frequently get thanks from new one after I have complemented,
wikiadjusted  their articles (HELP is appreciated)

I never get a Thanks for putting up templates, neither on articles or an
editors discussions page

To my surprise, I do getTthanks though, when I am tougher and removes an
article and put the text on a  subpage to the editor, followed by a
message often almost harsh ("fluffy text", "unecyclopedic", "no
sources", "unclear what is meant" etc) (Any type of personal feedback
relevant to the person action IS appreciated)

My three key actions to new editors are
HELP, fix their articles directly, wikify, put on categories, infoboxes
find sources and images and do this within an hour of its creation and
without putting on templates
SHOW APPRECIATION when a number of good action is seen, put on a
personal message of appreciation on the editors talkpage praising
his/her knowledge and competence
INVOLVE after a time a month or two of repeated good actions, get the
person involved by asking issues in his/her expert ares, invite to a IRL
meting with other experts in his/her area of interest

So absolutely "The editor retention problem will not be solved with
technological gizmos and doodads, nor with top-down solutions imposed
from above. " it is with personal messages and contacts and appriecation
of competence

Anders



Craig Franklin skrev 2014-08-26 12:18:

> I agree with this wholeheartedly.  When I think back to when I was new on
> Wikipedia, pretty early on I got an honest-to-god personal message from
> someone to thank me for correcting a typo (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lankiveil&diff=5647166&oldid=5629943
> ).
>   It made me feel like this was a community of nice people that I wanted to
> collaborate on things with, and was probably instrumental in me sticking
> around.
>
> The editor retention problem will not be solved with technological gizmos
> and doodads, nor with top-down solutions imposed from above.  It will be
> solved with positive human contact and creating a collaborative community
> that people actually want to be a part of, rather than one that they put up
> with.  Template welcomes and messages that have all the warmth of a form
> letter enclosed in a utility bill won't make a lasting improvement in the
> long run.  The intention behind things like the "thank" button are great,
> but they should be seen as at most an enabler, rather than as the actual
> solution to our problems.
>
> Cheers,
> Craig
>
>
>
>
>
> On 26 August 2014 10:09, David Goodman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Perhaps the best way of doing this is the admittedly laborious method of
>> personally communicating with new editors who seem promising and
>> encouraging them and offering to help them continue. The key word in this
>> is "personally". It cannot be effectively done with  wikilove messages ,
>> and certainly not with anything that looks like a template. Template
>> welcomes are essentially in the same class as mail or web
>> "personalized"advertisements.  What works is to show that you actually read
>> and appreciated what they are doing, to the extent you wanted to write
>> something specific.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Wikimedia ch is doing a big investment in supporting communities.
>>>
>>> There are three community liaisons (a third hired recently) to support
>> the
>>> three national languages which are also within the biggest linguistic
>>> communities.
>>>
>>> Anyway there is not a unique solution to be adapted easily in user
>>> retention and recruiting because the world is varioius as it is the life.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Il 24/ago/2014 03:56 "James Salsman" <[hidden email]> ha scritto:
>>>
>>>> Is there a list somewhere of all currently active Foundation
>>>> initiatives for attracting and retaining active editors?  I am only
>>>> aware of the one project, "Task Recommendations," to try to encourage
>>>> editors who have made a few edits to make more, described starting at
>>>>   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JbZ1uWoKEg&t=60m20s
>>>>
>>>> I am not worried about pageviews at all, given that the trend is as
>>>> constant as it has ever been when mobile users are added in to the
>>>> total. Sadly, the greater number of mobile users appears to be harming
>>>> active editor numbers beyond their already dismal trend, so it would
>>>> be nice to have an idea of exactly how much effort the Foundation is
>>>> applying to its only strategic goal which it is not achieved, and has
>>>> not ever achieved. I am amazed that so much more effort continues to
>>>> be applied to the other goals, all of which have always been met
>>>> through to the present. What does this state of affairs say about the
>>>> Foundation leadership's ability to prioritize?
>>>>
>>>> Is there any evidence at all that anyone in the Foundation is
>>>> interested in any kind of change which would make non-editors more
>>>> inclined to edit, or empower editors with social factors which might
>>>> provide more time, economic power, or other means to enable them to
>>>> edit more?
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>>> [hidden email]
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> David Goodman
>>
>> DGG at the enWP
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] editor retention initiatives

Ilario Valdelli
The question here is about "editor retention".

Honestly we can say "thank you" or we can use a lot of emoticons but the
problem is always the same.

At the first error the "thank you" and the pink sweet world disappears.

There is always someone in the other side who is so gentle like the
elephants in the a store of crystal things.

The biggest problem in my opinion is to continue selecting administrators
considering only their technical point of view and never their community
management capacities.

Every time I meet someone who left the Wikimedia projects the problem is
the same: a conflict and frequently some block which seems to be "unclear"
and "incorrect".

Please introduce something that is able to associate the beautiful words to
the beautiful actions.

HELP
APPRECIATE
INVOLVE

Are really good points and applied not only to the new editors but to all
editors.



On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Anders Wennersten <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> I agree with Craig
>
> The Thank function is not only good to give to new editors but also as a
> measurement to what action is appreciated by new beginners
>
> I frequently get thanks from new one after I have complemented,
> wikiadjusted  their articles (HELP is appreciated)
>
> I never get a Thanks for putting up templates, neither on articles or an
> editors discussions page
>
> To my surprise, I do getTthanks though, when I am tougher and removes an
> article and put the text on a  subpage to the editor, followed by a message
> often almost harsh ("fluffy text", "unecyclopedic", "no sources", "unclear
> what is meant" etc) (Any type of personal feedback relevant to the person
> action IS appreciated)
>
> My three key actions to new editors are
> HELP, fix their articles directly, wikify, put on categories, infoboxes
> find sources and images and do this within an hour of its creation and
> without putting on templates
> SHOW APPRECIATION when a number of good action is seen, put on a personal
> message of appreciation on the editors talkpage praising his/her knowledge
> and competence
> INVOLVE after a time a month or two of repeated good actions, get the
> person involved by asking issues in his/her expert ares, invite to a IRL
> meting with other experts in his/her area of interest
>
> So absolutely "The editor retention problem will not be solved with
> technological gizmos and doodads, nor with top-down solutions imposed from
> above. " it is with personal messages and contacts and appriecation of
> competence
>
> Anders
>
>
>
> Craig Franklin skrev 2014-08-26 12:18:
>
>  I agree with this wholeheartedly.  When I think back to when I was new on
>> Wikipedia, pretty early on I got an honest-to-god personal message from
>> someone to thank me for correcting a typo (
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:
>> Lankiveil&diff=5647166&oldid=5629943
>> ).
>>   It made me feel like this was a community of nice people that I wanted
>> to
>> collaborate on things with, and was probably instrumental in me sticking
>> around.
>>
>> The editor retention problem will not be solved with technological gizmos
>> and doodads, nor with top-down solutions imposed from above.  It will be
>> solved with positive human contact and creating a collaborative community
>> that people actually want to be a part of, rather than one that they put
>> up
>> with.  Template welcomes and messages that have all the warmth of a form
>> letter enclosed in a utility bill won't make a lasting improvement in the
>> long run.  The intention behind things like the "thank" button are great,
>> but they should be seen as at most an enabler, rather than as the actual
>> solution to our problems.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Craig
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 26 August 2014 10:09, David Goodman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>  Perhaps the best way of doing this is the admittedly laborious method of
>>> personally communicating with new editors who seem promising and
>>> encouraging them and offering to help them continue. The key word in this
>>> is "personally". It cannot be effectively done with  wikilove messages ,
>>> and certainly not with anything that looks like a template. Template
>>> welcomes are essentially in the same class as mail or web
>>> "personalized"advertisements.  What works is to show that you actually
>>> read
>>> and appreciated what they are doing, to the extent you wanted to write
>>> something specific.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>  Wikimedia ch is doing a big investment in supporting communities.
>>>>
>>>> There are three community liaisons (a third hired recently) to support
>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>> three national languages which are also within the biggest linguistic
>>>> communities.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway there is not a unique solution to be adapted easily in user
>>>> retention and recruiting because the world is varioius as it is the
>>>> life.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Il 24/ago/2014 03:56 "James Salsman" <[hidden email]> ha scritto:
>>>>
>>>>  Is there a list somewhere of all currently active Foundation
>>>>> initiatives for attracting and retaining active editors?  I am only
>>>>> aware of the one project, "Task Recommendations," to try to encourage
>>>>> editors who have made a few edits to make more, described starting at
>>>>>   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JbZ1uWoKEg&t=60m20s
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not worried about pageviews at all, given that the trend is as
>>>>> constant as it has ever been when mobile users are added in to the
>>>>> total. Sadly, the greater number of mobile users appears to be harming
>>>>> active editor numbers beyond their already dismal trend, so it would
>>>>> be nice to have an idea of exactly how much effort the Foundation is
>>>>> applying to its only strategic goal which it is not achieved, and has
>>>>> not ever achieved. I am amazed that so much more effort continues to
>>>>> be applied to the other goals, all of which have always been met
>>>>> through to the present. What does this state of affairs say about the
>>>>> Foundation leadership's ability to prioritize?
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there any evidence at all that anyone in the Foundation is
>>>>> interested in any kind of change which would make non-editors more
>>>>> inclined to edit, or empower editors with social factors which might
>>>>> provide more time, economic power, or other means to enable them to
>>>>> edit more?
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> David Goodman
>>>
>>> DGG at the enWP
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>>> [hidden email]
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>>>
>>>  _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>



--
Ilario Valdelli
Wikimedia CH
Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre
Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera
Switzerland - 8008 Zürich
Wikipedia: Ilario <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ilario>
Skype: valdelli
Facebook: Ilario Valdelli <https://www.facebook.com/ivaldelli>
Twitter: Ilario Valdelli <https://twitter.com/ilariovaldelli>
Linkedin: Ilario Valdelli <http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=6724469>
Tel: +41764821371
http://www.wikimedia.ch
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Wikimedia-l] personally communicating with new editors (was: Re: editor retention initiatives)

svetlana
In reply to this post by David Goodman-2
Hi,

David Goodman wrote:
> Perhaps the best way of doing this is the admittedly laborious method of
> personally communicating with new editors who seem promising and
> encouraging them and offering to help them continue. The key word in this
> is "personally". It cannot be effectively done with  wikilove messages ,
> and certainly not with anything that looks like a template. Template
> welcomes are essentially in the same class as mail or web
> "personalized"advertisements.  What works is to show that you actually read
> and appreciated what they are doing, to the extent you wanted to write
> something specific.

Thanks, I agree. I'm pretty passionate about making a difference in this area. I would personally go and start doing that /right now/, but the question remains open: Which activity should I engage in for all that to happen?

- Look at recent edits and collaborate with new people? That's a most thankless item on this list, perhaps, as people edit more than anything else.
- Look at newly created pages and collaborate on those with due care and attention to the new people? That'd be nice. (although imo the drafts process at English Wikipedia creates an unnecessary hierarchy -- I'd love to remain a peer and treat the newcomer as a source of wonderful knowledge, not as a reviewee or mentoree. For this reason, I might perhaps only do this to articles created in main namespace.)
- I had written a script [2] which makes draft review things more personal by not using a template in review comments, but I couldn't figure out whom to approach to get it deployed, or how to prevent ugly [3] templates on talk pages of people who submitted a draft for review.
- Reworking the welcome template into something else? Into what specifically?
- There are other things I tried to do, such as leave simple short messages such as [4], but I have not been doing enough of them to figure out who likes them.
- Many many examples, warning vandals for example, completely template thing, they get reborn as trolls, etc. see also [5]. But there is a need to not feed them still, i.e. put some effort into personal communication but not too much.
- Figuring out how to provide IP contributors with more software, up to the point it's technically possible? ([1] lists some software limitations).
- <add your thought here>

How do I set priorities in such list? Where to start tackling the problem?

svetlana

[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Musings_about_unregistered_contributors
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gryllida/DraftsReview
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Artistintown
[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:128.194.3.84
[5] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Clogged_talk_pages

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] personally communicating with new editors (was: Re: editor retention initiatives)

Edward Saperia-3
How about starting a campaign to grow and develop the community around
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Snuggle ?

*Edward Saperia*
Conference Director Wikimania London <http://www.wikimanialondon.org>
email <[hidden email]> • facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/edsaperia> • twitter
<http://www.twitter.com/edsaperia> • 07796955572
133-135 Bethnal Green Road, E2 7DG


On 26 August 2014 13:03, svetlana <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> David Goodman wrote:
> > Perhaps the best way of doing this is the admittedly laborious method of
> > personally communicating with new editors who seem promising and
> > encouraging them and offering to help them continue. The key word in this
> > is "personally". It cannot be effectively done with  wikilove messages ,
> > and certainly not with anything that looks like a template. Template
> > welcomes are essentially in the same class as mail or web
> > "personalized"advertisements.  What works is to show that you actually
> read
> > and appreciated what they are doing, to the extent you wanted to write
> > something specific.
>
> Thanks, I agree. I'm pretty passionate about making a difference in this
> area. I would personally go and start doing that /right now/, but the
> question remains open: Which activity should I engage in for all that to
> happen?
>
> - Look at recent edits and collaborate with new people? That's a most
> thankless item on this list, perhaps, as people edit more than anything
> else.
> - Look at newly created pages and collaborate on those with due care and
> attention to the new people? That'd be nice. (although imo the drafts
> process at English Wikipedia creates an unnecessary hierarchy -- I'd love
> to remain a peer and treat the newcomer as a source of wonderful knowledge,
> not as a reviewee or mentoree. For this reason, I might perhaps only do
> this to articles created in main namespace.)
> - I had written a script [2] which makes draft review things more personal
> by not using a template in review comments, but I couldn't figure out whom
> to approach to get it deployed, or how to prevent ugly [3] templates on
> talk pages of people who submitted a draft for review.
> - Reworking the welcome template into something else? Into what
> specifically?
> - There are other things I tried to do, such as leave simple short
> messages such as [4], but I have not been doing enough of them to figure
> out who likes them.
> - Many many examples, warning vandals for example, completely template
> thing, they get reborn as trolls, etc. see also [5]. But there is a need to
> not feed them still, i.e. put some effort into personal communication but
> not too much.
> - Figuring out how to provide IP contributors with more software, up to
> the point it's technically possible? ([1] lists some software limitations).
> - <add your thought here>
>
> How do I set priorities in such list? Where to start tackling the problem?
>
> svetlana
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Musings_about_unregistered_contributors
> [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gryllida/DraftsReview
> [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Artistintown
> [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:128.194.3.84
> [5] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Clogged_talk_pages
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] editor retention initiatives

David Goodman-2
In reply to this post by Ilario Valdelli
I too have seen some good results with the "thank" feature ( There are even
better results when I write something specific.) I agree with Anders that
the thank message is especially useful when sent to me, indicating that
something I did was understood--in my case, usually that if I accepted or
rescued an article the person is still around. Ideally I should follow it
up with a real message. I But if it's in response to something like
deletion, I am always unsure if it's genuine thanks, or meant in the
opposite sense. One of the advantage in using real language is greater
clarity.

I still remember exactly some encouraging things said to me by experienced
users  in my first few months when I first came here 8 years ago; mot were
not separate messages, but in the course of discussion. When difficulties
arise, I recall them to encourage myself. I even read over my RfA from time
to time.

 I completely agree with Liam that the way forward in many areas is with
the Wikiprojects. They need further development, but I'm not sure how much
of this requires additional software, rather than additional  active
participation. We should learn from the most successful, such as military
history. (or chemistry or medicine) They're a self-organizing feature, with
the advantage of not requiring funding or help from the foundation. Some
have  however on enWP become somewhat of a closed circle, immune to
community views to the point of trying to maintain guidelines the community
does not support .he remedy for this as for essentially everything else is
increased participation.


On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:

> The question here is about "editor retention".
>
> Honestly we can say "thank you" or we can use a lot of emoticons but the
> problem is always the same.
>
> At the first error the "thank you" and the pink sweet world disappears.
>
> There is always someone in the other side who is so gentle like the
> elephants in the a store of crystal things.
>
> The biggest problem in my opinion is to continue selecting administrators
> considering only their technical point of view and never their community
> management capacities.
>
> Every time I meet someone who left the Wikimedia projects the problem is
> the same: a conflict and frequently some block which seems to be "unclear"
> and "incorrect".
>
> Please introduce something that is able to associate the beautiful words to
> the beautiful actions.
>
> HELP
> APPRECIATE
> INVOLVE
>
> Are really good points and applied not only to the new editors but to all
> editors.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Anders Wennersten <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > I agree with Craig
> >
> > The Thank function is not only good to give to new editors but also as a
> > measurement to what action is appreciated by new beginners
> >
> > I frequently get thanks from new one after I have complemented,
> > wikiadjusted  their articles (HELP is appreciated)
> >
> > I never get a Thanks for putting up templates, neither on articles or an
> > editors discussions page
> >
> > To my surprise, I do getTthanks though, when I am tougher and removes an
> > article and put the text on a  subpage to the editor, followed by a
> message
> > often almost harsh ("fluffy text", "unecyclopedic", "no sources",
> "unclear
> > what is meant" etc) (Any type of personal feedback relevant to the person
> > action IS appreciated)
> >
> > My three key actions to new editors are
> > HELP, fix their articles directly, wikify, put on categories, infoboxes
> > find sources and images and do this within an hour of its creation and
> > without putting on templates
> > SHOW APPRECIATION when a number of good action is seen, put on a personal
> > message of appreciation on the editors talkpage praising his/her
> knowledge
> > and competence
> > INVOLVE after a time a month or two of repeated good actions, get the
> > person involved by asking issues in his/her expert ares, invite to a IRL
> > meting with other experts in his/her area of interest
> >
> > So absolutely "The editor retention problem will not be solved with
> > technological gizmos and doodads, nor with top-down solutions imposed
> from
> > above. " it is with personal messages and contacts and appriecation of
> > competence
> >
> > Anders
> >
> >
> >
> > Craig Franklin skrev 2014-08-26 12:18:
> >
> >  I agree with this wholeheartedly.  When I think back to when I was new
> on
> >> Wikipedia, pretty early on I got an honest-to-god personal message from
> >> someone to thank me for correcting a typo (
> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:
> >> Lankiveil&diff=5647166&oldid=5629943
> >> ).
> >>   It made me feel like this was a community of nice people that I wanted
> >> to
> >> collaborate on things with, and was probably instrumental in me sticking
> >> around.
> >>
> >> The editor retention problem will not be solved with technological
> gizmos
> >> and doodads, nor with top-down solutions imposed from above.  It will be
> >> solved with positive human contact and creating a collaborative
> community
> >> that people actually want to be a part of, rather than one that they put
> >> up
> >> with.  Template welcomes and messages that have all the warmth of a form
> >> letter enclosed in a utility bill won't make a lasting improvement in
> the
> >> long run.  The intention behind things like the "thank" button are
> great,
> >> but they should be seen as at most an enabler, rather than as the actual
> >> solution to our problems.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Craig
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 26 August 2014 10:09, David Goodman <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >>  Perhaps the best way of doing this is the admittedly laborious method
> of
> >>> personally communicating with new editors who seem promising and
> >>> encouraging them and offering to help them continue. The key word in
> this
> >>> is "personally". It cannot be effectively done with  wikilove messages
> ,
> >>> and certainly not with anything that looks like a template. Template
> >>> welcomes are essentially in the same class as mail or web
> >>> "personalized"advertisements.  What works is to show that you actually
> >>> read
> >>> and appreciated what they are doing, to the extent you wanted to write
> >>> something specific.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>  Wikimedia ch is doing a big investment in supporting communities.
> >>>>
> >>>> There are three community liaisons (a third hired recently) to support
> >>>>
> >>> the
> >>>
> >>>> three national languages which are also within the biggest linguistic
> >>>> communities.
> >>>>
> >>>> Anyway there is not a unique solution to be adapted easily in user
> >>>> retention and recruiting because the world is varioius as it is the
> >>>> life.
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards
> >>>> Il 24/ago/2014 03:56 "James Salsman" <[hidden email]> ha scritto:
> >>>>
> >>>>  Is there a list somewhere of all currently active Foundation
> >>>>> initiatives for attracting and retaining active editors?  I am only
> >>>>> aware of the one project, "Task Recommendations," to try to encourage
> >>>>> editors who have made a few edits to make more, described starting at
> >>>>>   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JbZ1uWoKEg&t=60m20s
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I am not worried about pageviews at all, given that the trend is as
> >>>>> constant as it has ever been when mobile users are added in to the
> >>>>> total. Sadly, the greater number of mobile users appears to be
> harming
> >>>>> active editor numbers beyond their already dismal trend, so it would
> >>>>> be nice to have an idea of exactly how much effort the Foundation is
> >>>>> applying to its only strategic goal which it is not achieved, and has
> >>>>> not ever achieved. I am amazed that so much more effort continues to
> >>>>> be applied to the other goals, all of which have always been met
> >>>>> through to the present. What does this state of affairs say about the
> >>>>> Foundation leadership's ability to prioritize?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Is there any evidence at all that anyone in the Foundation is
> >>>>> interested in any kind of change which would make non-editors more
> >>>>> inclined to edit, or empower editors with social factors which might
> >>>>> provide more time, economic power, or other means to enable them to
> >>>>> edit more?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> >>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> >>>>> [hidden email]
> >>>>> Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >>>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> >>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> >>>> [hidden email]
> >>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> ,
> >>>> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> David Goodman
> >>>
> >>> DGG at the enWP
> >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG
> >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> >>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> >>> [hidden email]
> >>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >>> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >>>
> >>>  _______________________________________________
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> >> [hidden email]
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Ilario Valdelli
> Wikimedia CH
> Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
> Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre
> Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera
> Switzerland - 8008 Zürich
> Wikipedia: Ilario <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ilario>
> Skype: valdelli
> Facebook: Ilario Valdelli <https://www.facebook.com/ivaldelli>
> Twitter: Ilario Valdelli <https://twitter.com/ilariovaldelli>
> Linkedin: Ilario Valdelli <http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=6724469
> >
> Tel: +41764821371
> http://www.wikimedia.ch
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>



--
David Goodman

DGG at the enWP
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] personally communicating with new editors (was: Re: editor retention initiatives)

Joe Decker
In reply to this post by svetlana
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 5:03 AM, svetlana <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> - Look at newly created pages and collaborate on those with due care and
> attention to the new people? That'd be nice. (although imo the drafts
> process at English Wikipedia creates an unnecessary hierarchy -- I'd love
> to remain a peer and treat the newcomer as a source of wonderful knowledge,
> not as a reviewee or mentoree. For this reason, I might perhaps only do
> this to articles created in main namespace.)
>

Take a look through WP:PAFC--you'll find lots of new people, and many of
them getting burnt not just by rude comments but by waiting weeks for any
comment at all.

Quite a bit of gatekeeping is necessary there, however.  There's more
advertisements and copyvios than serious content coming in through that
channel.  I would prefer, however, that AfC head more toward quickly
assessing that, and take on a more collaborative role beyond the most
serious issues.

The gatekeeping function would be a lot easier if the New Pages Feed tool
was modified to work in this arena, but I'm told that there's been
resistance to this idea from engineering.   If that's true, and it may not
be, it's a pity.

Our automation for copyvio detection is also pathetic, I can catch more
copyvios by "pick a sentence, Google it" than CorenBot and its kin identify
automatically.  Smarter technology there built into the right tool for the
job would be extremely helpful, why are we throwing away the limited
resource of experienced editor's time doing mechanical checks?

- I had written a script [2] which makes draft review things more personal
> by not using a template in review comments, but I couldn't figure out whom
> to approach to get it deployed, or how to prevent ugly [3] templates on
> talk pages of people who submitted a draft for review.
>

There are a couple folks to talk to, but they all follow WT:AFC, and I'd
start there.  But better would be to figure out how to integrate that work
into Special:NewPagesFeed.

However, while all of this is true, I think it's not the biggest problem.


What is?  Right now, there are around 2600 new editors waiting for a
friendly word from anyone, and over 1000 of them have been waiting for
three weeks or more.

Endless waiting is not engaging.

Any discussion which attempts to imagine we can help attract and hold new
editors without finding a plausible, constructive solution to that backlog
is missing the forest through the trees.  Improved automation
(Special:NewPagesFeed, copyright detection improvements), nicer wording,
and so forth could both make the process more pleasant for experienced
editors to participate in and focusing attention away from serious problems
and onto engagement with editors with serious potential.  There is room for
technology to play a significant supporting role.

The whole process of new articles from new editors needs a fresh look as
well.

80% of those new editors are going to fail at what they are trying to
do--their articles will get deleted. In most cases, no amount of help would
have saved their particular article idea.  It's a damn shame that
Foundation policy the editing community prevents us from educating them
before they invest quite a bit of work into articles that are doomed to
failure, because I'm pretty sure that "I put a good deal of work into
something over a couple months and it all came to nothing" is a recipe for
whatever the opposite of editor retention is.  And we need to face that
fact straight in the eye and come to some sensible way of fixing it.

--Joe

--
Joe Decker
www.joedecker.net
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] personally communicating with new editors (was: Re: editor retention initiatives)

Todd Allen
I think, especially given that the Foundation has indicated some
willingness to review their stance regarding such community initiatives,
it's time to revisit the idea of a time-limited trial of restricting
mainspace new page creation to autoconfirmed (and manually confirmed)
editors. The concern there was that it would hurt in attracting new
editors, but I think it'd be immensely helpful in doing so.

The problems indicated on this thread are the exact ones this was intended
to fix, from two angles. The first is that it will help to stem the tide of
true garbage from editors who don't ever intend to be helpful.
Copy-pasters, spammers, and vandals will probably largely be put off by
that requirement rather than bothering to fulfill it. Right now, new page
curators are spending so much time dealing with that crapflood that they
just don't have time to personally engage those whose articles are deleted,
especially when many of them just wanted to post an advertisement or "JOHN
U SUCK LULZ!!!!!" and have no interest in anything else.

The second benefit, though, allows us to take that time saved to focus on
the good-faith but green new editor, who's maybe about to start writing a
page about their friend's garage band. A lot of people have no idea that
type of thing isn't accepted on Wikipedia, and really think they're being
helpful by writing it. They might be the type who's willing to engage a
bit, make a few helpful edits, get some contact with experienced editors,
and realize that their article idea isn't going to fly. That's a great deal
better than getting the "Your article will be nuked from orbit, sorry"
message after they actually did put some time into learning markup and
writing halfway decently. At the very least, they'll be funneled into a
guided process instead, where they hopefully can be given more helpful
feedback.

At the very least, it's worth taking another look at the proposal to try it
and use the trial period to gain useful data on its effects.


On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Joe Decker <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 5:03 AM, svetlana <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > - Look at newly created pages and collaborate on those with due care and
> > attention to the new people? That'd be nice. (although imo the drafts
> > process at English Wikipedia creates an unnecessary hierarchy -- I'd love
> > to remain a peer and treat the newcomer as a source of wonderful
> knowledge,
> > not as a reviewee or mentoree. For this reason, I might perhaps only do
> > this to articles created in main namespace.)
> >
>
> Take a look through WP:PAFC--you'll find lots of new people, and many of
> them getting burnt not just by rude comments but by waiting weeks for any
> comment at all.
>
> Quite a bit of gatekeeping is necessary there, however.  There's more
> advertisements and copyvios than serious content coming in through that
> channel.  I would prefer, however, that AfC head more toward quickly
> assessing that, and take on a more collaborative role beyond the most
> serious issues.
>
> The gatekeeping function would be a lot easier if the New Pages Feed tool
> was modified to work in this arena, but I'm told that there's been
> resistance to this idea from engineering.   If that's true, and it may not
> be, it's a pity.
>
> Our automation for copyvio detection is also pathetic, I can catch more
> copyvios by "pick a sentence, Google it" than CorenBot and its kin identify
> automatically.  Smarter technology there built into the right tool for the
> job would be extremely helpful, why are we throwing away the limited
> resource of experienced editor's time doing mechanical checks?
>
> - I had written a script [2] which makes draft review things more personal
> > by not using a template in review comments, but I couldn't figure out
> whom
> > to approach to get it deployed, or how to prevent ugly [3] templates on
> > talk pages of people who submitted a draft for review.
> >
>
> There are a couple folks to talk to, but they all follow WT:AFC, and I'd
> start there.  But better would be to figure out how to integrate that work
> into Special:NewPagesFeed.
>
> However, while all of this is true, I think it's not the biggest problem.
>
>
> What is?  Right now, there are around 2600 new editors waiting for a
> friendly word from anyone, and over 1000 of them have been waiting for
> three weeks or more.
>
> Endless waiting is not engaging.
>
> Any discussion which attempts to imagine we can help attract and hold new
> editors without finding a plausible, constructive solution to that backlog
> is missing the forest through the trees.  Improved automation
> (Special:NewPagesFeed, copyright detection improvements), nicer wording,
> and so forth could both make the process more pleasant for experienced
> editors to participate in and focusing attention away from serious problems
> and onto engagement with editors with serious potential.  There is room for
> technology to play a significant supporting role.
>
> The whole process of new articles from new editors needs a fresh look as
> well.
>
> 80% of those new editors are going to fail at what they are trying to
> do--their articles will get deleted. In most cases, no amount of help would
> have saved their particular article idea.  It's a damn shame that
> Foundation policy the editing community prevents us from educating them
> before they invest quite a bit of work into articles that are doomed to
> failure, because I'm pretty sure that "I put a good deal of work into
> something over a couple months and it all came to nothing" is a recipe for
> whatever the opposite of editor retention is.  And we need to face that
> fact straight in the eye and come to some sensible way of fixing it.
>
> --Joe
>
> --
> Joe Decker
> www.joedecker.net
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] personally communicating with new editors (was: Re: editor retention initiatives)

WereSpielChequers-2
In reply to this post by James Salsman-2
Re Todd Allen's remark about raising the threshold for article creation to auto confirmed: "Copy-pasters, spammers, and vandals will probably largely be put off by that requirement rather than bothering to fulfill it" is an interesting theory, the counter view is that vandals and other bad faith editors will do the minimum necessary to commit their damage, but a proportion of good faith editors will be lost if you make it more difficult for them.

From my experiences in Wikimedia sites and elsewhere I find the latter theory much more convincing than the former. So i judge proposals such as ACTrial on the assumption that they would be a significantly greater deterrent to good editors than to bad ones. Of course I may be wrong, as might be those who disagree with me.

This is one of those things where a controlled scientific test would be useful - another is the ongoing divide between those who think it important to template new editors and their articles as fast as possible in order that they know the flaws in their editing before they stop editing, and those like me who would like to slow down or better re channel the effort of templaters on the assumption that the faster they  template the newbies the quicker the newbies will leave.

It is very difficult to achieve consensus for change where large parts of the community work on diametrically opposed assumptions. Independent neutral research might make it easier to build consensus and better decisions.

Regards

Jonathan (WereSpielChequers)


> On 26 Aug 2014, at 17:06, [hidden email] wrote:
>
> Copy-pasters, spammers, and vandals will probably largely be put off by
> that requirement rather than bothering to fulfill it

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] editor retention initiatives

Ricordisamoa
In reply to this post by Craig Franklin
Il 26/08/2014 12:18, Craig Franklin ha scritto:
> The editor retention problem will not be solved with technological gizmos
> and doodads, nor with top-down solutions imposed from above.  It will be
> solved with positive human contact and creating a collaborative community
> that people actually want to be a part of, rather than one that they put up
> with.
This makes my first RFBOT on the Italian Wikipedia
<https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bot/Autorizzazioni/Archivio/2013#SamoaBot>
come to my mind.
I was much less experienced than now, and ended up flooding Recent
Changes. A bureaucrat threatened
<https://it.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=56154161&oldid=56152222> to
block me, and I even retired
<https://it.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=56157910> for a day.
But I was already 'addicted' to Wikipedia and came back soon after.

Thanks to that episode, I gradually became a quite experienced operator.
But... how many users would have given up in my place?
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] editor retention initiatives

Isarra Yos
On 02/09/14 10:56, Ricordisamoa wrote:

> Il 26/08/2014 12:18, Craig Franklin ha scritto:
>> The editor retention problem will not be solved with technological
>> gizmos
>> and doodads, nor with top-down solutions imposed from above.  It will be
>> solved with positive human contact and creating a collaborative
>> community
>> that people actually want to be a part of, rather than one that they
>> put up
>> with.
> This makes my first RFBOT on the Italian Wikipedia
> <https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bot/Autorizzazioni/Archivio/2013#SamoaBot>
> come to my mind.
> I was much less experienced than now, and ended up flooding Recent
> Changes. A bureaucrat threatened
> <https://it.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=56154161&oldid=56152222> to
> block me, and I even retired
> <https://it.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=56157910> for a day.
> But I was already 'addicted' to Wikipedia and came back soon after.
>
> Thanks to that episode, I gradually became a quite experienced
> operator. But... how many users would have given up in my place?

If someone has already gone to the trouble of making a bot, it seems
unlikely that they would give up after a single incident. I've seen it
happen after a protracted series of such incidents/screwups, but that's
perhaps better for everyone involved anyway at that point.

-I

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>