encouraging women's participation

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
58 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: encouraging women's participation

Keegan Peterzell
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 5:23 PM, Noein <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Moreover, I think attracting readers is very different from attracting
> editors. I don't see how it would be positive to convince people to edit
> articles with superficial reasons in mind.
>

I'm glad to see that you were being saterical before.  I thought you had
more sense than that.

Attracting consumers is a much more complicated issue than attracting
editors.  Editors seem to find their niche or go away.

Attracting readers takes a constant vigilance over how Wikimedia projects
are portrayed in media, pop culture, and casual conversations.  There is a
fine balance there.  The readers part dabbles with the interaction of
editors.  We want readers to fix typos, clean up things, and monkey about.
To make them into editors, they have to have A) the interest B) a positive
experience and C) the desire.  Desire is different from interest, because
that is the compulsion to stick around and I consider this to be the most
important part.

However, if we can gain at least interest, that is half of the battle even
though there are three parts.  It is important that we, as the ones with
desire, foster the environment to invite the casual reader into at least
understanding what we're doing.  We all know about the popular
misconceptions are about Wikimedia projects, and we are bound to educate and
relate to the reader if we want to cause the tipping point of creating an
environment that is open, welcoming, but also importantly goal-oriented.
This ties into the congruant thread, but I'm avoiding cross-posting.

In other words, editors find their own interests and where they fit in.  If
we are going to encourage *reader* participation, that requires active
encouragement from the community to develop a sense of trust.  It's true
that you can't believe everything you read on Wikipedia.  That also applies
to print and online sources and what your neighbor tells you the other
neighbor did.  We have the capacity to actively correct ourselves and each
other, which is a medium more powerful than most realize.

It's up to us.

--
~Keegan

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

Re: encouraging women's participation

Keegan Peterzell
In reply to this post by Milos Rancic-2
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Milos Rancic <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> You are missing the point again :) I am not talking about transforming
> user pages into MySpace pages, but about new layer at all Wikimedia
> projects, which would stay at the place of Special:Preferences. So, it
> is about personal space, which rudimentary exists inside of watchlist
> and similar. It is also about customization. For example, as a
> registered user, I want to have customized Main Page for myself. Also,
> those who don't want to use that, they should be able not to use.
>

I do get your point, Milos.  I tend to ramble, so perhaps you aren't getting
mine :)

I would like to keep anything like this off of WMF projects.  That does not
discount the notion that these social ideas are not beneficial.  What I am
saying is that facebook is now working with Wikipedia content, so keep it
there.  They already have the society and software to keep up with the ideas
that have been floated in this thread.  We can always improve how we deal
with inter/intra relations, but I don't think that these ideas are solution
to the problems outlined.

There are other methods of utilizing social network websites for our benefit
in garnering new editors, retaining old ones, and interesting potentials.  I
don't think that these implementations to MediaWiki will be the solution to
that.  Other means are far more fruitful, I think, and keeping our processes
how they are do promote stability which promotes interest.  People, as a
whole, don't like change.

Thanks for finding that TED link :)

--
~Keegan

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

Re: encouraging women's participation

Pronoein
In reply to this post by Keegan Peterzell
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 20/06/2010 04:33, Keegan Peterzell wrote:

> Attracting consumers is a much more complicated issue than attracting
> editors.  Editors seem to find their niche or go away.
>
> Attracting readers takes a constant vigilance over how Wikimedia projects
> are portrayed in media, pop culture, and casual conversations.  There is a
> fine balance there.  The readers part dabbles with the interaction of
> editors.  We want readers to fix typos, clean up things, and monkey about.
> To make them into editors, they have to have A) the interest B) a positive
> experience and C) the desire.  Desire is different from interest, because
> that is the compulsion to stick around and I consider this to be the most
> important part.
>
> However, if we can gain at least interest, that is half of the battle even
> though there are three parts.  It is important that we, as the ones with
> desire, foster the environment to invite the casual reader into at least
> understanding what we're doing.  We all know about the popular
> misconceptions are about Wikimedia projects, and we are bound to educate and
> relate to the reader if we want to cause the tipping point of creating an
> environment that is open, welcoming, but also importantly goal-oriented.
> This ties into the congruant thread, but I'm avoiding cross-posting.
Thank you for these deep thoughts.


> In other words, editors find their own interests and where they fit in.  If
> we are going to encourage *reader* participation, that requires active
> encouragement from the community to develop a sense of trust.  It's true
> that you can't believe everything you read on Wikipedia.
Oh, by the way, I see how that weakness can be a strength: you are
allowed to doubt and thus, correct.
"It's true that you can't believe everything you read on Wikipedia. It's
true that you can correct the mistakes."
"It's true that Politicians and Religious have manipulated their own
articles.
It's true that they ultimately failed."
"It's true that we know less than the paper Encyclopaedia, it's true
that we're learning faster."
Etc.



Also, I think there is a kind of academicians that could help us:
epistemologists? What are they saying about the Wikipedian knowledge? I
think they would be interested to study the way knowledge is collected,
built, organized, checked, debated, trusted. This is currently mostly
popular culture but maybe the same mechanisms could be applied to
science. Anyway, I think I have a way to reach Mario Bunge [1] and ask
him for his opinion. Would it be worth the effort?

One question that seems important to me: how can wp can help the science
and can the epistemology help wp?


[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mario_Bunge


On 20/06/2010 01:18, Milos Rancic wrote:
> As well as dopamine works during the work, not when the prize has been
> get: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrCVu25wQ5s
>
> But, it is just about money and goods, as well as that part of
> psychology is at the very beginning. Social rewards are much more
> powerful. (Note that there are many social stigmas because people
> won't do something for money or goods.) I believe that we would have
> an editor boom just with "like" button for edits, talk comments and
> comments [on Wikinews].

Insightful links. "If/then rewards narrow our focus".
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJMHlWDAAoJEHCAuDvx9Z6LumUIAKDLvUqMHu5le3fmnNvivfC1
ITySQLMfLhsuEVMwE3LPTbXBPj2jbvpBJyvsB8jmTr170zp2cucSXnqXw4ulw5+n
Z1DKfFO86KJ+Ly0HX9s0fSV6F9M/Og63zpuo+a05PDys/+0F+bv0Kp1jhly4Q6H/
ui5UOCLKapoaBUdmtCVPsXneBXOxuDt3FDkcrWO230gERWRh/V6oqo9SdC/fU5EF
89jOC0nY5Pm8fUYrF6mqEnmKrRoIvFKZ+CCcg1903kv0GnVNIeBRdEt1wwNvBoAK
lKSBGOZ0vxPaGJsRIXsJn2GEjfax+BZItkHKFQ+EULyulo2i8LamYn2Yv2Z4oeo=
=Q+fN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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

Re: encouraging women's participation

Tim Landscheidt
In reply to this post by Milos Rancic-2
Milos Rancic <[hidden email]> wrote:

> [...]
> Besides that, contemporary term for "site" is "social network". There
> are just more and less successful social networks. Wikimedia is
> successful social network for a very specific type of demographics:
> young middle class males. Actually, not so young anymore. I think that
> we are loosing males from younger generations, too.

> That means that we have to work on diversification of our editor
> demographics. And one edit in ten days is better than no edits at all.
> We need cleverly created concepts which would make editing easy, fun,
> causal. With a lot of interesting content around; probably, based on
> existing Wikimedia content, but not necessary.

> The time when wiki concept was new and interesting passed a few years
> ago. And even Microsoft has better sense for new technologies than us.

> For example, our goal is not to make a possibility to read Wikipedia
> from iPhone. Apple did that. The goal is to have easy access to
> editing from iPhone.

Isn't an iPhone one of those gadgets with about 10 cm of
screen and no keyboard? Why would we want to encourage some-
one to edit with such a device? It must be very frustrating
to do so properly, and we don't profit, in fact it is to our
disadvantage if it's done improperly.

  While I appreciate the efforts to encourage wider partici-
pation, IMHO we should make sure that we keep the quality of
our "products" and our "human resources" in mind. No edits
at all may be better than one edit in ten days for probably
99% of the population. And I don't think that we will at-
tract the right 1% who will wander the libraries and the web
in search of the missing pieces of information, tackle thick
books and pause before clicking on the "Save" button to es-
timate whether their edit will find the approval of their
peers, by emphasizing that editing is easy or fun - because
it isn't. And it probably shouldn't be.

Tim


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

Re: encouraging women's participation

geni
On 22 June 2010 00:10, Tim Landscheidt <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Isn't an iPhone one of those gadgets with about 10 cm of
> screen and no keyboard? Why would we want to encourage some-
> one to edit with such a device? It must be very frustrating
> to do so properly, and we don't profit, in fact it is to our
> disadvantage if it's done improperly.

Augmented reality.

Wikipedia's coverage of local history and geography benefits if we can
get edits from people on the move.

>  While I appreciate the efforts to encourage wider partici-
> pation, IMHO we should make sure that we keep the quality of
> our "products" and our "human resources" in mind. No edits
> at all may be better than one edit in ten days for probably
> 99% of the population.

Given that 99% of the population is over 6 billion people 1 edit every
ten days would result in a lot of worthwhile edits.

> And I don't think that we will at-
> tract the right 1% who will wander the libraries and the web
> in search of the missing pieces of information, tackle thick
> books and pause before clicking on the "Save" button to es-
> timate whether their edit will find the approval of their
> peers, by emphasizing that editing is easy or fun - because
> it isn't. And it probably shouldn't be.

If wikipedia is to survive it needs to be fun. If wikipedia is going
to get a broad coverage it needs to be easy.

--
geni

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

Re: encouraging women's participation

Pavlo Shevelo
> If wikipedia is to survive it needs to be fun. If wikipedia is going
> to get a broad coverage it needs to be easy.

Exactly!

> Given that 99% of the population is over 6 billion people 1 edit every
> ten days would result in a lot of worthwhile edits.

As to the best of my belief the healthier (more natural, organic)
future of WP and all other projects is contribution of wast amount of
people who work not so regularly - mainly when "curiosity strikes"
versus fierce/fanatic :-P activity of (relatively) very small ...tribe
of wp-geeks (like we are :) ).

pavlo

On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 3:21 AM, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 22 June 2010 00:10, Tim Landscheidt <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Isn't an iPhone one of those gadgets with about 10 cm of
>> screen and no keyboard? Why would we want to encourage some-
>> one to edit with such a device? It must be very frustrating
>> to do so properly, and we don't profit, in fact it is to our
>> disadvantage if it's done improperly.
>
> Augmented reality.
>
> Wikipedia's coverage of local history and geography benefits if we can
> get edits from people on the move.
>
>>  While I appreciate the efforts to encourage wider partici-
>> pation, IMHO we should make sure that we keep the quality of
>> our "products" and our "human resources" in mind. No edits
>> at all may be better than one edit in ten days for probably
>> 99% of the population.
>
> Given that 99% of the population is over 6 billion people 1 edit every
> ten days would result in a lot of worthwhile edits.
>
>> And I don't think that we will at-
>> tract the right 1% who will wander the libraries and the web
>> in search of the missing pieces of information, tackle thick
>> books and pause before clicking on the "Save" button to es-
>> timate whether their edit will find the approval of their
>> peers, by emphasizing that editing is easy or fun - because
>> it isn't. And it probably shouldn't be.
>
> If wikipedia is to survive it needs to be fun. If wikipedia is going
> to get a broad coverage it needs to be easy.
>
> --
> geni
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: encouraging women's participation

Milos Rancic-2
In reply to this post by Milos Rancic-2
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 1:18 AM, Milos Rancic <[hidden email]> wrote:
> http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation.html
>
> As well as dopamine works during the work, not when the prize has been
> get: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrCVu25wQ5s

Watch this, too:
http://g4tv.com/videos/44277/dice-2010-design-outside-the-box-presentation/

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

Re: encouraging women's participation

phoebe ayers-3
In reply to this post by Tim Landscheidt
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Tim Landscheidt <[hidden email]> wrote:

>  While I appreciate the efforts to encourage wider partici-
> pation, IMHO we should make sure that we keep the quality of
> our "products" and our "human resources" in mind. No edits
> at all may be better than one edit in ten days for probably
> 99% of the population. And I don't think that we will at-
> tract the right 1% who will wander the libraries and the web
> in search of the missing pieces of information, tackle thick
> books and pause before clicking on the "Save" button to es-
> timate whether their edit will find the approval of their
> peers, by emphasizing that editing is easy or fun - because
> it isn't. And it probably shouldn't be.
>
> Tim

spoken like a true wikipedian :)

(are you sure that editing isn't fun, though? I'm pretty sure that if
most of us didn't derive at least some joy from it (at some point in
our editing careers) we wouldn't be here having this conversation.)

I find it helpful to translate the question of whether editing is an
inherently elitist activity -- as it may well be -- by thinking of
analogies in the sphere of my day job, which is being a librarian in a
big university library.

To be a librarian -- or even to be a successful grad student or
professor -- you have to really, really like to do research. A lot.
You have to find true pleasure and satisfaction in chasing down the
world's most obscure references or figuring out how to make sense of
the literature on some topic. You have to be a total research nerd, in
other words.

But we cannot do research *for* every single student who wanders
through our doors (I serve a school of 30,000 people). We have to help
them figure it out how to do it themselves. And there's been a real
push in the last 20 years or so to move academic librarianship from
the model of the cranky old scholar who might let you touch the books,
to the model of teaching "information literacy" -- how to research and
evaluate information for yourself. I do a whole lot of teaching, and
it can be frustrating to watch student after student work on their
papers and do a bad job of their research and their bibliographies,
and complain about how it's not easy to do research, when you know
that it's possible to do it better. But my job is not to do it all for
them: it's also to aid them along the paths of becoming scholars
themselves. There's a real temptation to say "research isn't supposed
to be easy! It's supposed to be a rite of passage into the academy!
Get a backbone, kids!" But I think collectively in the profession we
have basically come to the understanding that taking that attitude
doesn't make it any easier for non-librarians and non-academics to
navigate our crazy, unusable systems -- doesn't make people of any age
any more likely to actually do research -- and that maybe, just maybe,
if we do enough outreach, and work enough on making our systems easier
and better, we'll reach more people overall as well as only the people
that are predisposed to become information nerds themselves.

I think of Wikipedia the same way. Sure, not everyone wants to or has
the ability to edit. And hey, there's a lot to be said for being
motivated enough to do it that you learn the systems without any help,
becoming a part of the community the way most of us did. But just
relying on those mechanisms does restrict our editor base a lot, and
saying that only those people willing to jump through many interface
and social hoops can join the club is just as unhelpful for our
worldwide community of researchers and writers -- and the world of
scholarship in general -- as keeping the books chained up in the
library was.

-- phoebe

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

Re: encouraging women's participation

Pavlo Shevelo
I like (and support) most of all the following wording

> ... there's a lot to be said for being
> motivated enough to do it that you learn the systems without any help,
> becoming a part of the community the way most of us did. But just
> relying on those mechanisms does restrict our editor base a lot, and
> saying that only those people willing to jump through many interface
> and social hoops can join the club is just as unhelpful for our
> worldwide community of researchers and writers

From that point of view we see two thresholds/barriers in front of
each WP-newcomer:
* to master craft of research;
* to master system (with DIY "facepages"/profiles, indents and
signatures in discussion, etc.) - that is interface hoop;
* becoming part of the community (socialization) - social hoop.
oh, actually there are three of them :)

Yes we (all of us) were motivated, even fanatic :) enough to survive
in so Spartan conditions, but should we insist that all newcomers have
to go same way?

Yes, one of favorite proverbs says
"Wind from the North creates Vikings"
but I'm not sure that Wikipedia needs only Vikings :)

Sincerely,

Pavlo


On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 12:59 AM, phoebe ayers <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Tim Landscheidt <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>  While I appreciate the efforts to encourage wider partici-
>> pation, IMHO we should make sure that we keep the quality of
>> our "products" and our "human resources" in mind. No edits
>> at all may be better than one edit in ten days for probably
>> 99% of the population. And I don't think that we will at-
>> tract the right 1% who will wander the libraries and the web
>> in search of the missing pieces of information, tackle thick
>> books and pause before clicking on the "Save" button to es-
>> timate whether their edit will find the approval of their
>> peers, by emphasizing that editing is easy or fun - because
>> it isn't. And it probably shouldn't be.
>>
>> Tim
>
> spoken like a true wikipedian :)
>
> (are you sure that editing isn't fun, though? I'm pretty sure that if
> most of us didn't derive at least some joy from it (at some point in
> our editing careers) we wouldn't be here having this conversation.)
>
> I find it helpful to translate the question of whether editing is an
> inherently elitist activity -- as it may well be -- by thinking of
> analogies in the sphere of my day job, which is being a librarian in a
> big university library.
>
> To be a librarian -- or even to be a successful grad student or
> professor -- you have to really, really like to do research. A lot.
> You have to find true pleasure and satisfaction in chasing down the
> world's most obscure references or figuring out how to make sense of
> the literature on some topic. You have to be a total research nerd, in
> other words.
>
> But we cannot do research *for* every single student who wanders
> through our doors (I serve a school of 30,000 people). We have to help
> them figure it out how to do it themselves. And there's been a real
> push in the last 20 years or so to move academic librarianship from
> the model of the cranky old scholar who might let you touch the books,
> to the model of teaching "information literacy" -- how to research and
> evaluate information for yourself. I do a whole lot of teaching, and
> it can be frustrating to watch student after student work on their
> papers and do a bad job of their research and their bibliographies,
> and complain about how it's not easy to do research, when you know
> that it's possible to do it better. But my job is not to do it all for
> them: it's also to aid them along the paths of becoming scholars
> themselves. There's a real temptation to say "research isn't supposed
> to be easy! It's supposed to be a rite of passage into the academy!
> Get a backbone, kids!" But I think collectively in the profession we
> have basically come to the understanding that taking that attitude
> doesn't make it any easier for non-librarians and non-academics to
> navigate our crazy, unusable systems -- doesn't make people of any age
> any more likely to actually do research -- and that maybe, just maybe,
> if we do enough outreach, and work enough on making our systems easier
> and better, we'll reach more people overall as well as only the people
> that are predisposed to become information nerds themselves.
>
> I think of Wikipedia the same way. Sure, not everyone wants to or has
> the ability to edit. And hey, there's a lot to be said for being
> motivated enough to do it that you learn the systems without any help,
> becoming a part of the community the way most of us did. But just
> relying on those mechanisms does restrict our editor base a lot, and
> saying that only those people willing to jump through many interface
> and social hoops can join the club is just as unhelpful for our
> worldwide community of researchers and writers -- and the world of
> scholarship in general -- as keeping the books chained up in the
> library was.
>
> -- phoebe
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: encouraging women's participation

Milos Rancic-2
I've started page: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/How_to_encourage_participation

Feel free to add your ideas.

If the page with the same idea exists elsewhere -- let's say at
Strategy Wiki -- please merge pages and let the list know.

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

Re: encouraging women's participation

Eugene Eric Kim
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 10:13 PM, Milos Rancic <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I've started page: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/How_to_encourage_participation
>
> Feel free to add your ideas.
>
> If the page with the same idea exists elsewhere -- let's say at
> Strategy Wiki -- please merge pages and let the list know.

There's lots of great research and proposals on encouraging participation at:

http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Participation

=Eugene

--
======================================================================
Eugene Eric Kim ................................ http://xri.net/=eekim
Blue Oxen Associates ........................ http://www.blueoxen.com/
======================================================================

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

Re: encouraging women's participation

Milos Rancic-2
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 8:17 AM, Eugene Eric Kim <[hidden email]> wrote:
> There's lots of great research and proposals on encouraging participation at:
>
> http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Participation

Thanks! This page [1] has the similar scope, actually.

[1] - http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Attracting_and_retaining_participants

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

Re: encouraging women's participation

KIZU Naoko
In reply to this post by Sydney Poore
One thing we can do would be to make contributors' names more visible.
Translators for WMF stuff too (Ting Chen made a good point about the
latter in Alexandria). Many websites gives clear credits to
contributors - not only for-profit media, but websites whose content
is mainly written by volunteers, like Global Online. In TED related
translations, their translators' names are on the same webpage of
video or transcript,   and much visible than in MediaWiki history
pages.

On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 12:47 AM, Sydney Poore <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Oh, I agree that thanking someone for their service to WMF projects is
> important, too. We need to do more to recognize the invaluable contributions
> that we people make to keep the various projects going.
>
> But, in addition to giving encouragement though thanks and recognition, I
> support introducing social features into our projects. The main benefit and
> focus for the on site features would be the ability for people with similar
> interests to connect with each other as they work together on site.
>
> See the list of ideas from the strategic planning process.
>
> http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Task_force/Recommendations/Community_health_1Volunteer
> recognition
>
> http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Task_force/Recommendations/Community_health_4Social
> features
>
> Sydney
>
> On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 6:15 PM, Marc Riddell <[hidden email]>wrote:
>
>> Sydney,
>>
>> I agree with your thoughts here. But you are talking about activities
>> community members can participate in. I am talking about how those
>> community
>> members interact with each other.
>>
>> Marc
>>
>>
>> on 6/19/10 5:58 PM, Sydney Poore at [hidden email] wrote:
>>
>> > English Wikipedia has numerous contests during the year. Some people
>> > regularly participate in them and enjoy them.
>> >
>> > Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Contest is an example of one that
>> is
>> > ongoing.
>> >
>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MILCON
>> >
>> > Picture of the year is popular with some people on Commons.
>> >
>> > While everyone does not want to be involved in contests, they appeal to
>> some
>> > people and I see no problem with us introducing more of them in WMF
>> projects
>> > to see if they will draw people into the movement.
>> >
>> > I feel the same way about encouraging new ways to get different groups of
>> > people involved with WMF projects.
>> >
>> > If gaming can be used to promote an interest in WMF then that is
>> goodness.
>> > Puzzles, board games, and even more complex fantasy games using content
>> > might be a draw for some people. If someone wants to develop them I would
>> > not stand in there way.
>> >
>> > Combining community service and socializing is very common in community
>> > organizations, and is appealing to many people. By adding more social
>> > components to WMF projects, we will most likely draw in people that
>> > otherwise would not volunteer. I see this as an important tool and one
>> that
>> > should not be dismissed if we are going to broaden the base of our
>> > volunteers.
>> >
>> > Sydney Poore
>> > (FloNight)
>> >
>> > On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 5:29 PM, Marc Riddell
>> > <[hidden email]>wrote:
>> >
>> >> on 6/19/10 4:58 PM, Keegan Peterzell at [hidden email] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> <snip>.
>> >>>
>> >>> There was a great TED speech that I need to look up but don't have the
>> >> time
>> >>> for at the moment.  The premise of the presentation is that studies
>> have
>> >>> shown time and time again that things like games, prizes, awards and
>> >> other
>> >>> measures of gratitude are only temporary measures to increase
>> motivation.
>> >>> The folks that work for you that are the truly motivated ones and
>> >> believers
>> >>> in the process do not ask for these rewards.  A pat on the back and a
>> >> "good
>> >>> job, thanks for your work because I value it very much" occasionally is
>> >> the
>> >>> only true recognition that is needed.  The other fluff only inspires
>> >>> distraction from the goal because it's creating other little goals
>> which,
>> >> in
>> >>> turn, become more important than the end result.
>> >>
>> >> Yes! Prizes denote direct competition as in sports or, more subtly, with
>> >> the
>> >> science & arts awards.
>> >>
>> >> Person-to-person affirmation goes a very long way; and is what
>> >> collaboration
>> >> & community should be based upon. Give them the climate, and they will
>> give
>> >> you the culture.
>> >>
>> >> Marc Riddell
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> 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
>>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



--
KIZU Naoko
http://d.hatena.ne.jp/Britty (in Japanese)
Quote of the Day (English): http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/WQ:QOTD

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

Re: encouraging women's participation

Andre Engels
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 2:56 PM, Aphaia <[hidden email]> wrote:
> One thing we can do would be to make contributors' names more visible.
> Translators for WMF stuff too (Ting Chen made a good point about the
> latter in Alexandria). Many websites gives clear credits to
> contributors - not only for-profit media, but websites whose content
> is mainly written by volunteers, like Global Online. In TED related
> translations, their translators' names are on the same webpage of
> video or transcript,   and much visible than in MediaWiki history
> pages.

I think that would be a great idea, although it does have some nuts
and bolts - some way or another, one will have to filter out those who
did just minor edits, for example, or people who do not want their
edits to be named. Then again, the strength of our system is that our
system doesn't need to be perfect, if it's community-editable things
will probably work out quite reasonable. I myself would be much in
favor of it, and if I did not fear the "that's not how we do things"
and "that's unwiki" crowd, I might even have considered doing a test
with it.

--
André Engels, [hidden email]

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

Re: encouraging women's participation

Nikola Smolenski-2
In reply to this post by Milos Rancic-2
Дана Saturday 19 June 2010 08:37:37 Milos Rancic написа:
> On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Nikola Smolenski <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Дана Saturday 19 June 2010 07:37:18 Milos Rancic написа:
> >> On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 7:30 AM, Nikola Smolenski <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> >> > Or perhaps we don't even have to build one, but just use the existing
> >> > ones. [People are always against making Wikipedia a social network.]
> >> > Have RSS feeds of articles you created/pictures you uploaded. These
> >> > could then be connected to Facebook or wherever for your friends to
> >> > see what are you working on.
> >>
> >> Then you are using Facebook, not Wikimedia. And Flickr is much better
> >> for private photos than Wikimedia.
> >
> > Then your Facebook friends will see that you are doing interesting things
> > on Wikipedia projects and will want to do them too.
>
> I don't think that it is particularly interesting to see someone's
> edits. If you are not a passionate Wikimedian, of course.

If your friends are so disinterested in Wikipedia that they aren't even
interested in your contributions to it, why would they be interested in using
Wikipedia as their social network?

Anyway, I made this so anyone who would like to experiment, can.
http://toolserver.org/~nikola/snrss.php

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

Re: encouraging women's participation

Milos Rancic-2
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 6:27 PM, Nikola Smolenski <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Дана Saturday 19 June 2010 08:37:37 Milos Rancic написа:
>> I don't think that it is particularly interesting to see someone's
>> edits. If you are not a passionate Wikimedian, of course.
>
> If your friends are so disinterested in Wikipedia that they aren't even
> interested in your contributions to it, why would they be interested in using
> Wikipedia as their social network?

I am not interested in my own edits. They are very boring. I don't
have any especial interest in, let's say, Mardetanha's edits at fa.wp
as I don't know Persian. However, he is my friend and I am interested
in what is going with him. I can inform myself about him at Facebook
or at Twitter, but I could do that at Wikimedia, too. Which means that
I could spend much more time on Wikimedia and probably to make some
fix or a little bigger edit anywhere. Instead, I am just doing my
bureaucratic tasks, while I am socializing at some other place. Which
gives my content there, not to Wikimedia.

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

Re: encouraging women's participation

Nikola Smolenski-2
In reply to this post by Nikola Smolenski-2
Дана Wednesday 23 June 2010 18:27:43 Nikola Smolenski написа:
> Anyway, I made this so anyone who would like to experiment, can.
> http://toolserver.org/~nikola/snrss.php

I see that people who tried it either haven't written any new articles
recently or have encountered a bug (on non-English Wikipedias). Write an
article and/or try again :)

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

Re: encouraging women's participation

Milos Rancic-2
123