I have seen little evidence either way.
-Original Message-
From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of edward
Sent: 01 June 2014 01:14 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Increase participation [WAS: The
On 1 June 2014 05:53, Ting Chen wrote:
> Hello Risker,
>
> you have my sympathy, and let me tell you this: I am man and programmer,
> and when I edit articles nowaday I tend to ignore the info boxes and the
> templates at the end of each article. If I create a new article and I
> happen don't hav
On 01/06/2014 13:37, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
>>are more common in professions where women are underrepresented.
Why are they underrepresented?
ignotum per ignotius
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailin
On 06/01/2014 07:13 AM, edward wrote:
> Which explains the gender bias, yes?
At least in large part; Risker explained it more eloquently than I.
There is a bias against women because the skillsets currently useful to
be able to edit wikitext (programming, heavy markup languages) are more
common in
On 6/1/14, 11:53 AM, Ting Chen wrote:
And I think it is essential to tell the beginner to do the same: Don't
bother with things that are too complicated, it is the content that
counts.
Yes, I think we need to publicize this more widely. People are usually
surprised when I tell them that as a
I agree with Ting's remarks about the importance of the social aspect.
Maybe we need a taskforce against rudeness. But looking into the social
aspect does not exclude improvements on the tech side.
I think that maybe instead of VE we should have an 'invisible editor',
meaning that if someone hits
On 01/06/2014 12:00, Peter Southwood wrote:
Phototypesetters were typically professionals, therefore not strictly
comparable.
There is a significant difference to learning a complex system because you are
going to earn a living from it, and learning the same system so you can spend
your free
-Original Message-
From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of James Salsman
Sent: 01 June 2014 05:26 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Increase participation [WAS: The first three weeks]
> (non
On 01/06/2014 10:53, Ting Chen wrote:
>>Nowaday Wikipedia articles (across all major languages) are highly
biased in style and in content to academic thesis.
There is good reason for this: 'anyone can edit'. In an encyclopedia
produced using the 'one best way' approach, there is sparse use of
Fæ, 01/06/2014 07:39:
As someone who has run editathons on women focused topics, I found
this an odd comment that does not match anecdotal experience. New
women users seem little different to men
I, too, failed to see any difference in dozens (mainly female)
librarians editing, when watching t
Hello Risker,
you have my sympathy, and let me tell you this: I am man and programmer,
and when I edit articles nowaday I tend to ignore the info boxes and the
templates at the end of each article. If I create a new article and I
happen don't have a similar article with the templates and infob
On 1 June 2014 03:40, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
> On 05/31/2014 08:27 PM, James Salsman wrote:
>> Individual editors' skill with wikitext should be independent of
>> almost all of the systemic biases from which we suffer [...]
> Seriously?
> I have (non-CS) engineer friends that, upon hitting tha
On 1 June 2014 01:39, Fæ wrote:
> On 1 June 2014 04:26, James Salsman wrote:
> ...
> >>... selects strongly against women.
> >
> > Where is the evidence that women have more difficulty understanding
> > wikitext than men?
>
> (Probably drifting to "Increase participation by women")
>
> As someon
On 1 June 2014 04:26, James Salsman wrote:
...
>>... selects strongly against women.
>
> Where is the evidence that women have more difficulty understanding
> wikitext than men?
(Probably drifting to "Increase participation by women")
As someone who has run editathons on women focused topics, I
> (non-CS) engineer friends ... upon hitting that edit button,
> basically went "Gak! No way!"
Wikitext is simpler than what phototypesetter operators in the
1960s-1990s had to deal with, and they had a much better gender
balance.
> Wikitext resitricts editing to pretty much only "computer scien
On 05/31/2014 08:27 PM, James Salsman wrote:
> Individual editors' skill with wikitext should be independent of
> almost all of the systemic biases from which we suffer [...]
Seriously?
I have (non-CS) engineer friends that, upon hitting that edit button,
basically went "Gak! No way!"
Wikitext
> "being able to figure out wikitext" might be a good attribute,
> but making it a requirement pretty much sacrifices any hope
> we have of getting rid of our systemic bias
Individual editors' skill with wikitext should be independent of
almost all of the systemic biases from which we suffer e
"even finding the glaring typo you saw in a reference is nearly impossible
after you hit the edit button." -- Marc
Yes, it was, as references were getting longer and longer (almost to the
point of including the author's likesa and deslikes and what he or she had
for breakfast. That was 'solved' by
On 05/29/2014 08:57 PM, James Salsman wrote:
> but it was misplaced because being able to figure out wikitext
> is an excellent attribute in new editors
I think that statement fails on two aspects: for one, saying that the
enthusiasm 'was misplaced' is rather premature as VE itself is rather
incom
Rui Correia wrote:
>...
> tell me whether we are bleeding new or old members.
http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Editor_Trends_Study/Results
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Editor_lifecycle
and
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Editor_classes
agree: we lose experienced editors at
n 29 May 2014 15:43, Lila Tretikov wrote:
> We have deeper graphs. I want to be sensitive to our product team's time,
> but I am sure they will share when they can.
Hi Lila,
As well as WMF teams, there are quite a few volunteers about who pull
reports from the database or through the API and gen
On 29 May 2014 15:31, Rui Correia wrote:
> Neither of those answers my question. I doesn't tell me whether we are
> bleeding new or old members. The reason for an editor of either group to
> leave are different. All that that graph shows is that there has been a
> frightful drop since 2007.
The r
We have deeper graphs. I want to be sensitive to our product team's time,
but I am sure they will share when they can.
The short answer -- I believe -- the the community tends to gravitate
towards its current state and loose new editors at a higher rate. This is
not unusual in general of course --
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
wrote:
> Fæ, 29/05/2014 16:07:
>
>> Perhaps we should have some more memorable on-wiki short-cuts to link
>> and find these reports?
>
>
> I suggested Erik Zachte that we could override the default
> [[MediaWiki:statistics-footer]] (which is em
Hi Frederico
Neither of those answers my question. I doesn't tell me whether we are
bleeding new or old members. The reason for an editor of either group to
leave are different. All that that graph shows is that there has been a
frightful drop since 2007.
Rui
2014-05-29 15:28 GMT+02:00 Federico
Fæ, 29/05/2014 16:07:
Perhaps we should have some more memorable on-wiki short-cuts to link
and find these reports?
I suggested Erik Zachte that we could override the default
[[MediaWiki:statistics-footer]] (which is empty) on all Wikimedia wikis
to link relevant WikiStats reports, but he's t
On 29/05/2014, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
...
> In the end what retention matters for is
> http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediansEditsGt5.htm
That is an incredibly useful report.
If like me, most people find this a hard table to remember how to
locate, a link to a project-specific vers
Rui Correia, 29/05/2014 15:01:
Do we have any figures on retention of new editors?
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=advanced&search=retention&fulltext=Search&ns202=1&profile=advanced
How long does the
average new editor stay? What percentage of new editors
[Chaging subject line as (1) topic has moved on (2) need to ensure
visibility by rising above the Lila/ Wil never ending story frenzy.]
Hi James
Do we have any figures on retention of new editors? How long does the
average new editor stay? What percentage of new editors stays on for 6
months; one
29 matches
Mail list logo
