Mailing List Archive

[Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement?
Hi everyone,

On July 11th at the next WMF Metrics & Activities meeting, myself, Erik
Möller, Howie Fung, Maryana Pinchuk, and Dario Taraborelli are going to
deliver a short update on the state of Wikimedia editor communities. (For
those not familiar:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings)

This is the beginning of the new fiscal year for the WMF, and we'd like to
use this time to recap what we know about the decline or growth of
Wikimedia communities. We're focusing on the following set of questions...

* Are Wikimedia projects as a whole in decline?
* Is English Wikipedia in decline?
* Which WMF projects have been successful in driving growth?
* Which non-WMF trends have driven growth (e.g. community projects)?
* How does data/measurement enable us to drive growth?
* Which future changes are expected to drive growth?

I'm reaching out to this list on behalf of the team, so that we can get a
list of the non-WMF projects that have had a measurable impact on the size
or diversity of Wikimedia projects.

One obvious example that comes to mind is Wiki Loves Monuments. Others are
the Wikipedia Challenge in Kiswahili and Setswana, and edit-a-thons, such
as this year's fashion edit-a-thon put together by Wikimedia Sverige.

What am I missing from this list?

--
Steven Walling
https://wikimediafoundation.org/
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
Steven Walling, 23/06/2013 01:34:
> One obvious example that comes to mind is Wiki Loves Monuments. Others are
> the Wikipedia Challenge in Kiswahili and Setswana, and edit-a-thons, such
> as this year's fashion edit-a-thon put together by Wikimedia Sverige.
>
> What am I missing from this list?

I don't know, maaaaaaaany things.
1) I'm confused: first you ask about community initiatives then you list
activities by chapters and the like. "Community initiative" makes me
think of edit drives, custom tools and scripts, processes, guidelines,
configurations.
2) Are you interested in last year or all our history?
3) Is it really impossible to look for the impact on the statistics
(assuming you're speaking of eiting activity) and then ask what caused
the impact? How much big but indetected/undetectable impact is there?
(There must be contrasting forces for that.) Are you interested in
impact that can't be even seen in statistics?

Nemo

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 12:47 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
<nemowiki@gmail.com>wrote:

> 1) I'm confused: first you ask about community initiatives then you list
> activities by chapters and the like. "Community initiative" makes me think
> of edit drives, custom tools and scripts, processes, guidelines,
> configurations.
>

Sorry for the confusion. I'm open to hearing about any non-WMF activity,
but I assumed that people would be most knowledgeable
about initiatives that came from chapters or other parts of the community.


> 2) Are you interested in last year or all our history?
>

Let's say since about 2011, with more recent being of primary interest.


> 3) Is it really impossible to look for the impact on the statistics
> (assuming you're speaking of eiting activity) and then ask what caused the
> impact? How much big but indetected/undetectable impact is there? (There
> must be contrasting forces for that.) Are you interested in impact that
> can't be even seen in statistics?
>

We're also looking at which projects are growing, so as you say, looking at
the stats and then asking what caused it. If you are aware of a editor
recruitment or retention activity that measured, I'd also be interested in
hearing about that, even if it didn't necessarily make some kind of visible
jump in the total active editors of a project.

Steven

P.S. Thanks to the folks who reached out off-list with examples.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
Briefly, from the train (so no links):

1. The Wikipedia Challenge competitions were not community initiatives;
they were Google initiatives.

2. Agree with Nemo about tools' importance.

3. I'd call out the Tamil Wikipedia Media Contest: great return on very
modest investment (of funds); and the Malayalam WikiSangaMotsavam, a series
of community and outreach events around a big community gathering, that
correlates with a noticeable rise in active editors in MLWP. Both are
community initiatives supported by WMF grants.

A.
On Jun 25, 2013 11:05 AM, "Steven Walling" <steven.walling@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 12:47 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
> <nemowiki@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > 1) I'm confused: first you ask about community initiatives then you list
> > activities by chapters and the like. "Community initiative" makes me
> think
> > of edit drives, custom tools and scripts, processes, guidelines,
> > configurations.
> >
>
> Sorry for the confusion. I'm open to hearing about any non-WMF activity,
> but I assumed that people would be most knowledgeable
> about initiatives that came from chapters or other parts of the community.
>
>
> > 2) Are you interested in last year or all our history?
> >
>
> Let's say since about 2011, with more recent being of primary interest.
>
>
> > 3) Is it really impossible to look for the impact on the statistics
> > (assuming you're speaking of eiting activity) and then ask what caused
> the
> > impact? How much big but indetected/undetectable impact is there? (There
> > must be contrasting forces for that.) Are you interested in impact that
> > can't be even seen in statistics?
> >
>
> We're also looking at which projects are growing, so as you say, looking at
> the stats and then asking what caused it. If you are aware of a editor
> recruitment or retention activity that measured, I'd also be interested in
> hearing about that, even if it didn't necessarily make some kind of visible
> jump in the total active editors of a project.
>
> Steven
>
> P.S. Thanks to the folks who reached out off-list with examples.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Asaf Bartov <abartov@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Briefly, from the train (so no links):
>
> 1. The Wikipedia Challenge competitions were not community initiatives;
> they were Google initiatives.
>
> 2. Agree with Nemo about tools' importance.
>
> 3. I'd call out the Tamil Wikipedia Media Contest: great return on very
> modest investment (of funds); and the Malayalam WikiSangaMotsavam, a series
> of community and outreach events around a big community gathering, that
> correlates with a noticeable rise in active editors in MLWP. Both are
> community initiatives supported by WMF grants.
I'm currently not on a train, so here are two links:
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2012/04/20/postcard-from-the-tamil-community/
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:WikiSangamotsavam_2012/Malayalam_Wiki_Conference_2012/Report
>
> A.
> On Jun 25, 2013 11:05 AM, "Steven Walling" <steven.walling@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 12:47 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
>> <nemowiki@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>> > 1) I'm confused: first you ask about community initiatives then you list
>> > activities by chapters and the like. "Community initiative" makes me
>> think
>> > of edit drives, custom tools and scripts, processes, guidelines,
>> > configurations.
>> >
>>
>> Sorry for the confusion. I'm open to hearing about any non-WMF activity,
>> but I assumed that people would be most knowledgeable
>> about initiatives that came from chapters or other parts of the community.
>>
>>
>> > 2) Are you interested in last year or all our history?
>> >
>>
>> Let's say since about 2011, with more recent being of primary interest.
>>
>>
>> > 3) Is it really impossible to look for the impact on the statistics
>> > (assuming you're speaking of eiting activity) and then ask what caused
>> the
>> > impact? How much big but indetected/undetectable impact is there? (There
>> > must be contrasting forces for that.) Are you interested in impact that
>> > can't be even seen in statistics?
>> >
>>
>> We're also looking at which projects are growing, so as you say, looking at
>> the stats and then asking what caused it. If you are aware of a editor
>> recruitment or retention activity that measured, I'd also be interested in
>> hearing about that, even if it didn't necessarily make some kind of visible
>> jump in the total active editors of a project.
>>
>> Steven
>>
>> P.S. Thanks to the folks who reached out off-list with examples.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l



--
Tilman Bayer
Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications)
Wikimedia Foundation
IRC (Freenode): HaeB

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
The recent community initiative with the highest impact I can think of
is surely what Platonides and other members of the global (technical)
community did on pt.wiki. Platonides noticed a configuration error on
pt.wiki: CAPTCHA was required for all edits since 2008. The error was
fixed in April. <https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/41745>

Fresh stats produced by the WMF show that in May and June this produced
a decrease of overall vandalism (or rather, of reverted edits) with a
shocking +58 % increase of productive edits by IPs and +23 % for
registered users. It seems pt.wiki may see the end of the decline after
many years. :)
<https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio(a):HAndrade_(WMF)/Pesquisa_Vandalismo/Segunda_Fase&oldid=36301585>

Discussion is ongoing on how pt.wiki will address this growth. Part of
the community may think that "nao estamos preparados para crescer".
<https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Projetos/Wikip%C3%A9dia/Reuni%C3%B5es/Reuni%C3%A3o_IRC_21-06-2013>

Nemo

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
Wait - removing the captchas lead to a decrease of reverted edits in terms
of absolute numbers? Woot? Anyone has an explanation for that?




2013/7/5 Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemowiki@gmail.com>

> The recent community initiative with the highest impact I can think of is
> surely what Platonides and other members of the global (technical)
> community did on pt.wiki. Platonides noticed a configuration error on
> pt.wiki: CAPTCHA was required for all edits since 2008. The error was fixed
> in April. <https://bugzilla.wikimedia.**org/41745<https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/41745>
> >
>
> Fresh stats produced by the WMF show that in May and June this produced a
> decrease of overall vandalism (or rather, of reverted edits) with a
> shocking +58 % increase of productive edits by IPs and +23 % for registered
> users. It seems pt.wiki may see the end of the decline after many years. :)
> <https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/**index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio(**
> a):HAndrade_(WMF)/Pesquisa_**Vandalismo/Segunda_Fase&oldid=**36301585<https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio(a):HAndrade_(WMF)/Pesquisa_Vandalismo/Segunda_Fase&oldid=36301585>
> >
>
> Discussion is ongoing on how pt.wiki will address this growth. Part of the
> community may think that "nao estamos preparados para crescer".
> <https://pt.wikipedia.org/**wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Projetos/**
> Wikip%C3%A9dia/Reuni%C3%B5es/**Reuni%C3%A3o_IRC_21-06-2013<https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Projetos/Wikip%C3%A9dia/Reuni%C3%B5es/Reuni%C3%A3o_IRC_21-06-2013>
> >
>
> Nemo
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org <Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@**lists.wikimedia.org<wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org>
> ?subject=**unsubscribe>




--
Project director Wikidata
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Obentrautstr. 72 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. +49-30-219 158 26-0 | http://wikimedia.de

Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 5:42 PM, Denny Vrandečić <
denny.vrandecic@wikimedia.de> wrote:

> Wait - removing the captchas lead to a decrease of reverted edits in terms
> of absolute numbers? Woot? Anyone has an explanation for that?
>


Maybe a CAPTCHA is effective at demotivating bona fide editors and
motivates vandal, which vandalize as a revenge for the CAPTCHA? That would
be interesting :)
Marco

>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
Denny Vrandečić, 05/07/2013 17:42:
> Wait - removing the captchas lead to a decrease of reverted edits in terms
> of absolute numbers? Woot? Anyone has an explanation for that?

No, sorry if I was misleading: decrease in relative numbers only. :)
The tables are fairly readable even if you don't know Portuguese, I try
not to be too verbose sometimes. :P

Nemo

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
On 07/05/2013 01:07 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
> No, sorry if I was misleading: decrease in relative numbers only.

That's not surprising; someone with malice aforethought isn't going to
be stopped by a captcha, someone who just though "Hey, I'll correct that
typo" is likely to not want to bother.

-- Marc


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 8:42 AM, Denny Vrandečić <
denny.vrandecic@wikimedia.de> wrote:

> Wait - removing the captchas lead to a decrease of reverted edits in terms
> of absolute numbers? Woot? Anyone has an explanation for that?


I think the explanation is pretty clear from the numbers Nemo shared. This
CAPTCHA was annoying as hell, and was directed not just at people adding
links or hitting some kind of AbuseFilter, but everyone who was editing
anonymously or with a new account. It was literally throwing the baby out
with the bath water.

As someone who had to experience that CAPTCHA as a new user on ptwiki last
year, I am not surprised at all that we attracted many more positive
contributions just by removing it. Sadly, from looking at bug 49860 and
gerrit change 69982, it seems that this deeply annoying feature is going to
be put back in place.

--
Steven Walling
https://wikimediafoundation.org/
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
Hoi Steven,

When the facts show that having the CAPTCHA is a demonstrable BAD idea. It
should be easy to prevent CAPTCHA from being implemented again.

I am sure you know who to speak to.

Thanks,
GerardM


On 5 July 2013 21:02, Steven Walling <swalling@wikimedia.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 8:42 AM, Denny Vrandečić <
> denny.vrandecic@wikimedia.de> wrote:
>
> > Wait - removing the captchas lead to a decrease of reverted edits in
> terms
> > of absolute numbers? Woot? Anyone has an explanation for that?
>
>
> I think the explanation is pretty clear from the numbers Nemo shared. This
> CAPTCHA was annoying as hell, and was directed not just at people adding
> links or hitting some kind of AbuseFilter, but everyone who was editing
> anonymously or with a new account. It was literally throwing the baby out
> with the bath water.
>
> As someone who had to experience that CAPTCHA as a new user on ptwiki last
> year, I am not surprised at all that we attracted many more positive
> contributions just by removing it. Sadly, from looking at bug 49860 and
> gerrit change 69982, it seems that this deeply annoying feature is going to
> be put back in place.
>
> --
> Steven Walling
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
On Sat, Jul 6, 2013 at 7:49 AM, Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijssen@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hoi Steven,
>
> When the facts show that having the CAPTCHA is a demonstrable BAD idea. It
> should be easy to prevent CAPTCHA from being implemented again.
>

To be precise, the facts do not show that. They show the CAPTCHA is
responsible for significantly fewer good-faith contributions from casual
editors. That is is or is not a "bad idea", however, is a subjective
judgment, based on one's weighing of multiple factors.

Evidently, large parts of the PTWP community remain convinced that the
downsides of not having the CAPTCHA (easier vandalism? admin workload? --
I'm not really following that debate) outweigh the upsides. You (and I)
may well disagree, but let's recognize that this depends on our _judgment_
of priorities.

Whether or not an editing community's mandate for self-governance should
extend to the right to make such a fundamentally anti-wiki measure as the
emergency CAPTCHA feature a permanent one is debatable, of course.

Asaf
--
Asaf Bartov
Wikimedia Foundation <http://www.wikimediafoundation.org>

Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
https://donate.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
Asaf Bartov, 06/07/2013 23:51:
> To be precise, the facts do not show that. They show the CAPTCHA is
> responsible for significantly fewer good-faith contributions from casual
> editors. That is is or is not a "bad idea", however, is a subjective
> judgment, based on one's weighing of multiple factors.
>
> Evidently, large parts of the PTWP community remain convinced that the
> downsides of not having the CAPTCHA (easier vandalism? admin workload? --
> I'm not really following that debate) outweigh the upsides.

It's worth noting, among other things, that the vote in question ended
just before the stats were released.

Nemo

> You (and I)
> may well disagree, but let's recognize that this depends on our _judgment_
> of priorities.
>
> Whether or not an editing community's mandate for self-governance should
> extend to the right to make such a fundamentally anti-wiki measure as the
> emergency CAPTCHA feature a permanent one is debatable, of course.
>
> Asaf
>

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
That's been a very complex issue. Henrique will bring more context into
here.

For now, it's worth mentioning the Portuguese Wikipedia community has been
working on this antivandalism project
http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia_Discuss%C3%A3o:Projetos/AntiVandalismoin
order to build alternative measures to deal with vandalism and
inappropriate edits with a very small portion of the community reverting
edits - considering the short and mid terms.

They are already aware that even the return of emergency CAPTCHA won't be a
definite measure (lasting no more than one year, as per what was agreed)
and are handling to create other ways of preventing inappropriate content
through new approaches.

I actually believe that's a good idea and am happy to see there has been a
lot of work on that - out of comfort zone, but also conscious of the
current limitations in place.

Oona




On 6 July 2013 20:22, Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemowiki@gmail.com> wrote:

> Asaf Bartov, 06/07/2013 23:51:
>
> To be precise, the facts do not show that. They show the CAPTCHA is
>> responsible for significantly fewer good-faith contributions from casual
>> editors. That is is or is not a "bad idea", however, is a subjective
>> judgment, based on one's weighing of multiple factors.
>>
>> Evidently, large parts of the PTWP community remain convinced that the
>> downsides of not having the CAPTCHA (easier vandalism? admin workload? --
>> I'm not really following that debate) outweigh the upsides.
>>
>
> It's worth noting, among other things, that the vote in question ended
> just before the stats were released.
>
> Nemo
>
>
> You (and I)
>> may well disagree, but let's recognize that this depends on our _judgment_
>> of priorities.
>>
>> Whether or not an editing community's mandate for self-governance should
>> extend to the right to make such a fundamentally anti-wiki measure as the
>> emergency CAPTCHA feature a permanent one is debatable, of course.
>>
>> Asaf
>>
>>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org <Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@**lists.wikimedia.org<wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org>
> ?subject=**unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
On Sat, Jul 6, 2013 at 8:39 PM, Oona Castro <ocastro@wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> For now, it's worth mentioning the Portuguese Wikipedia community has been
> working on this antivandalism project
> http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia_Discuss%C3%A3o:Projetos/AntiVandalismoin
> order to build alternative measures to deal with vandalism and
> inappropriate edits with a very small portion of the community reverting
> edits - considering the short and mid terms.
>
> They are already aware that even the return of emergency CAPTCHA won't be a
> definite measure (lasting no more than one year, as per what was agreed)

As much as I dislike captchas, this seems like a considered decision
by the Portuguese Wikipedians. We should support local wiki
communities in making choices for themselves -- and help them to run
short-term experiments, evaluate the results, and correct mistakes.

Letting communities make and learn form their own mistakes is more
important than always being 'right' for one definition of rightness:
we can learn from many independent communities, each with their own
standards. Of course we all want to improve editor engagement +
retention, and overall quality + coverage - the pt:wp community does
too! The question is how to trade off between these.

One requirement for making a controversial configuration change - or
for continuing it beyond a short initial test period - might be the
ability of the requesting community to evaluate its effect.

Sam.

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
I'm following this ptwiki captcha case closely and I think I can bring some
elements for this conversation.

The portuguese community was surprised by the removal of catcha promoted by
the global (technical) community. This situation led then to react and a
long discussion was held not only about captcha but also about community
autonomy. Following Nemo sugestion on bug 41745 the Portuguese community
voted a new proposal to enable the captcha again.

When we look to the stats of ptwiki in May and June it is certain that the
number of reversions has increased a lot, but it is also true that the
number of non-reverted editions raised even more. But some editors claim
that sysop and rollbackers are overloaded and this numbers are showing us
that more "garbage" (revisions that should be reverted) is staying in
ptwiki and not that we are having more good faith editions. I believe that
it is very hard for us to tell which theory is right without performing an
A/B test.

Besides this debate, it is notorious that sysops and rollbackers are
felling overloaded and the growth of gross number of edits that should be
reverted (independent of the number of good editions) is a real concern for
the ptwiki quality. The community felt that it wasn't ready to deal with
this new amount of edits and decided that they should do something in the
short term to avoid demotivation of vandalism fighters, and the solution
they came up with was enabling the captcha again.

But, as Oona said, they know it cannot be a definite measure and the
"AntiVadalism Project" (
http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia_Discuss%C3%A3o:Projetos/AntiVandalismo)
was reactivated willing to create mid and long term measure to fight
vandalism enabling the community to deactivate captcha. In this context,
one think proposed is the use of the captcha associated with AbuseFilter
(as Steven suggested), but for this to happen bug 18110 should be
implemented. Also, they proposed bug 41522 to evaluated which kind of
editions are being kept away by the captcha (trying Marc Pelletier's
theory) and are working on improving bots, filters and asking for new users
to became rollbackers.

So, I think ptwiki community is leading many efforts to create sustainable
growth, and right now the captcha is a contextualized temporary part of the
plan.

Best,



Henrique Andrade


On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 4:21 PM, Samuel Klein <meta.sj@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 6, 2013 at 8:39 PM, Oona Castro <ocastro@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> >
> > For now, it's worth mentioning the Portuguese Wikipedia community has
> been
> > working on this antivandalism project
> >
> http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia_Discuss%C3%A3o:Projetos/AntiVandalismoin
> > order to build alternative measures to deal with vandalism and
> > inappropriate edits with a very small portion of the community reverting
> > edits - considering the short and mid terms.
> >
> > They are already aware that even the return of emergency CAPTCHA won't
> be a
> > definite measure (lasting no more than one year, as per what was agreed)
>
> As much as I dislike captchas, this seems like a considered decision
> by the Portuguese Wikipedians. We should support local wiki
> communities in making choices for themselves -- and help them to run
> short-term experiments, evaluate the results, and correct mistakes.
>
> Letting communities make and learn form their own mistakes is more
> important than always being 'right' for one definition of rightness:
> we can learn from many independent communities, each with their own
> standards. Of course we all want to improve editor engagement +
> retention, and overall quality + coverage - the pt:wp community does
> too! The question is how to trade off between these.
>
> One requirement for making a controversial configuration change - or
> for continuing it beyond a short initial test period - might be the
> ability of the requesting community to evaluate its effect.
>
> Sam.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Steven Walling <swalling@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> On July 11th at the next WMF Metrics & Activities meeting, myself, Erik
> Möller, Howie Fung, Maryana Pinchuk, and Dario Taraborelli are going to
> deliver a short update on the state of Wikimedia editor communities. (For
> those not familiar:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings)

This presentation will be at the meeting in 30 minutes. Don't worry if
you're interested but can't make it; the meeting will be recorded.


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

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
On 05/07/13 22:09, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
> The recent community initiative with the highest impact I can think of
> is surely what Platonides and other members of the global (technical)
> community did on pt.wiki. Platonides noticed a configuration error on
> pt.wiki: CAPTCHA was required for all edits since 2008. The error was
> fixed in April. <https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/41745>

Saying that Platonides discovered a configuration error on pt.wp and
fixed it is a bit like saying Captain Cook discovered New Zealand and
fixed its lack of pigs.

Of course, the pt.wp community was well aware of the situation. The
response of the pt.wp community to the original "emergency" -- asking
for CAPTCHAs to be enabled for everyone -- was very specific to that
community. I have to wonder whether the requesters were hoping for
implicit permanence.

It's a reminder that we need a robust procedure for making temporary
changes. In the past we have relied on the requester saying to us
afterwards "ok, it's all done now, you can revert it." That doesn't
work if "temporary" is said with a wink.

-- Tim Starling



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Erik Moeller <erik@wikimedia.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Steven Walling <swalling@wikimedia.org>
> wrote:
> > On July 11th at the next WMF Metrics & Activities meeting, myself, Erik
> > Möller, Howie Fung, Maryana Pinchuk, and Dario Taraborelli are going to
> > deliver a short update on the state of Wikimedia editor communities. (For
> > those not familiar:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings)
>
> This presentation will be at the meeting in 30 minutes. Don't worry if
> you're interested but can't make it; the meeting will be recorded.
>

The video is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALT8_Toyc0g now.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
Tim Starling, 12/07/2013 01:14:
> Of course, the pt.wp community was well aware of the situation.

I don't think so. Some community members were, but very few. It took 7
months to get a local discussion/vote on the matter start and conclude.
Proceurally, the absence of consensus for the configuration is the
reason why the default was restored.

> The
> response of the pt.wp community to the original "emergency" -- asking
> for CAPTCHAs to be enabled for everyone -- was very specific to that
> community. I have to wonder whether the requesters were hoping for
> implicit permanence.
>
> It's a reminder that we need a robust procedure for making temporary
> changes. In the past we have relied on the requester saying to us
> afterwards "ok, it's all done now, you can revert it." That doesn't
> work if "temporary" is said with a wink.

Indeed.

Nemo

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 4:27 PM, Steven Walling
<steven.walling@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Erik Moeller <erik@wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Steven Walling <swalling@wikimedia.org>
>> wrote:
>> > On July 11th at the next WMF Metrics & Activities meeting, myself, Erik
>> > Möller, Howie Fung, Maryana Pinchuk, and Dario Taraborelli are going to
>> > deliver a short update on the state of Wikimedia editor communities. (For
>> > those not familiar:
>> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings)
>>
>> This presentation will be at the meeting in 30 minutes. Don't worry if
>> you're interested but can't make it; the meeting will be recorded.
>>
>
> The video is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALT8_Toyc0g now.
And on a certain other website too:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WMF_Monthly_Metrics_Meeting_July_11,_2013.webm
(as usually, the video will also be included in the monthly WMF report
and Wikimedia Highlights)

--
Tilman Bayer
Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications)
Wikimedia Foundation
IRC (Freenode): HaeB

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
Steven Walling <steven.walling@...> writes:

>
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Erik Moeller <erik <at> wikimedia.org>
wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Steven Walling <swalling <at>
wikimedia.org>
> > wrote:
> > > On July 11th at the next WMF Metrics & Activities meeting, myself, Erik
> > > Möller, Howie Fung, Maryana Pinchuk, and Dario Taraborelli are going to
> > > deliver a short update on the state of Wikimedia editor communities. (For
> > > those not familiar:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings)
> >
> > This presentation will be at the meeting in 30 minutes. Don't worry if
> > you're interested but can't make it; the meeting will be recorded.
> >
>
> The video is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALT8_Toyc0g now.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request <at> lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Thanks for posting the video. My thoughts below went longer than I expected,
so I'll start with a tl;dr.

TL;DR: more is not always better in encyclopedia-building; please include
more analysis of the old-timers in your stats; the drama issues could
probably use a little bit of attention; find and help the community engage
the editors who interface with newbies; Wikiproject Med has tried to work on
recruiting scientists - a good idea; on curation and quality control, we
could use edit metadata; and please slow down and show you're actually
listening when it comes to Visual Editor.

1. Mixing up the gender and geographical distribution is a lofty and
laudable goal, but you may want to be a little careful of neglecting your
base. I also agree with a later comment that a high male ratio could
negatively affect the discussion process, which tends to be quite "testy" in
a few different ways, so more women could have beneficial side effects.
However, there are also risks when you change Wikipedia's population: for
example, if editing became mainstream in America Wikipedia's
secular-humanist/rational slant could be significantly eroded. I don't think
it is a big risk but it's something to keep in mind.

2. I was disappointed to hear that the analysis of active editors focused on
editors with 5+ edits/month. I'd like to see a stratified breakdown and it
seems like it wouldn't be hard to do. This plays into the caution above that
not much attention is paid to the long-term regulars, although the presenter
alluded to earlier research showing their staying power.

I've been following this list for maybe a month or two now and I'm a little
surprised that little to none of the regular wiki drama seems to leak out
and that the metrics made no mention of the drama. I'm sort of glad that
there is little drama in this world, but I hope it's not ignorance. For
example, the English wiki has been a bit more dramatic lately with some
high-profile admin and editor resignations leaving and concerns about unfair
processes (e.g., SMcCandlish). Some of it is just interpersonal and maybe
it's not different than usual, but it would be nice to have more than
anecdotal observations. There's also reoccurring controversies about
civility enforcement (I rarely bother to weigh in, but I believe in
enforcing civility). I think there might be a role for the Foundation in
researching these types of issues and streamlining some of the tools.

3. I agree that user experience is poor and I agree with all 5 points listed
in the reasons for stagnation. Poor social interaction is particularly
serious. Maybe there is something being done that I'm unaware of but as a
first start I would try to identify the editors who have a lot interaction
with new users and try to communicate with them. I'm not one of those users;
in the rare case that I see a promising new editor in my areas I welcome,
but I have never left a template without adding a short personal note
afterwards (the welcome template of Twinkle has no field for an optional
message, so it takes a little extra work). However, just today I noticed
that a newbie I mentored a little and who made significant improvements to
the PPACA (Obamacare) got hit by speedy image deletion templates with scary
"you may be blocked" bolded messages and no personal touch, even though the
images may well have been just fine. The templater probably templates a lot
of people and could use some mentoring, although how to approach that in a
polite manner is its own challenge (I gave him my 2 cents). This is also an
area where the community could develop yet more rules (oh fun!) to rein in
those who interface with new users.

4. On campaigns and editathons, I know the WikiProject Medicine, mainly
through Doc James, had been trying to engage with biomedical scientists and
doctors. This type of outreach is particularly nice because these are
exactly the type of smart and mature people you'd like to see building an
encyclopedia. We've also seen professors having their students edit medical
and biology articles, which can be a headache for regulars but probably
worth it.

5. Improving workflow and moving past talkpages is fine and dandy, but Erik
mentioned curation from mobile devices, so I'll plug (again) an old idea
I've floated now and again: edits could have metadata which shows how many
people glanced at a particular edit (with an option to actually sign off on
it), and further metadata noting whether references were added and if so
were they fact-checked. There's a lot more to building a good encyclopedia
than more users, and in fact in some cases more cooks in the kitchen just
makes things harder.

6. When I did limited testing of visual editor again about an hour ago it
seemed OK, with a few improvements since I'd tried before IIRC. I'm
optimistic about Visual Editor and I generally think it looks clean and
professional and appears highly-functional, so some congratulations are in
order. However, I don't think the deployment decisions should be delegated
to someone very close to the development process, which is what it sounds
like is happening.

With that said, I think you should err on the side of caution and I strongly
urge you to be very flexible in scheduling the full rollout (taking the
comments by Dragons flight at
Wikipedia:VP/T#Amended_VisualEditor_deployment_schedule that the "list of
known bugs ought to be very short at each phase of deployment" to heart; see
bugs at
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?product=VisualEditor&
bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&
bug_status=REOPENED&bug_severity=critical&bug_severity=grave&
bug_severity=major&bug_severity=crash&bug_severity=normal&
bug_severity=minor).
This has already caused a lot of strain with the regulars on the English
Wikipedia, and it is not clear that the developers are reviewing and
compiling all the feedback which has been made at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:VE/F. One concern I have is how edit
conflicts are handled, since they are easily resolved by copying/pasting the
code in the current system.

While you can cite "CONEXCEPT" over and over, if you push people too hard
and cause too much disruption they may just quit, and if enough regulars
quit, that could lead to a cascading effect which the Foundation may not
even notice before its gone pretty far. But I think the bigger problem is
damaging the already tenuous goodwill between the groups.


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
On 05/07/13 22:09, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
> The recent community initiative with the highest impact I can think of
> is surely what Platonides and other members of the global (technical)
> community did on pt.wiki. Platonides noticed a configuration error on
> pt.wiki: CAPTCHA was required for all edits since 2008. The error was
> fixed in April. <https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/41745>
>
> Fresh stats produced by the WMF show that in May and June this
> produced a decrease of overall vandalism (or rather, of reverted
> edits) with a shocking +58 % increase of productive edits by IPs and
> +23 % for registered users. It seems pt.wiki may see the end of the
> decline after many years. :)
> <https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio(a):HAndrade_(WMF)/Pesquisa_Vandalismo/Segunda_Fase&oldid=36301585>
>
>
> Discussion is ongoing on how pt.wiki will address this growth. Part of
> the community may think that "nao estamos preparados para crescer".
> <https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Projetos/Wikip%C3%A9dia/Reuni%C3%B5es/Reuni%C3%A3o_IRC_21-06-2013>

Note that CAPTCHAs have now been re-enabled on the Portuguese
Wikipedia. Erik made the decision, in response to on-wiki consensus. I
deployed the change just now.

<https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49860#c75>

-- Tim Starling


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement? [ In reply to ]
Tim Starling wrote:
>Note that CAPTCHAs have now been re-enabled on the Portuguese
>Wikipedia. Erik made the decision, in response to on-wiki consensus. I
>deployed the change just now.
>
><https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49860#c75>

Lest there be any confusion or doubt: this is a Bad Thing. We should take
this time to explicitly state here (or even re-state here, it's important)
that using CAPTCHAs in this way is a fundamental violation of our core
principles, particularly site accessibility and openness.

As a compromise measure between wiki sovereignty and autonomy and our
deeply held values, there's been a temporary reinstatement of the CAPTCHAs
on the Portuguese Wikipedia for the remainder of 2013. After December 31,
2013, these CAPTCHAs will be re-disabled. Hopefully no other wiki will
feel the need to invoke such a drastic measure ever again.

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>