Hmm. Integrating "push notifications" into training, as well as using them for recognition and suggestions for skill development, sounds like a good idea. Thanks for the suggestion!
Pine On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 7:16 PM, Stuart A. Yeates <[email protected]> wrote: > I have thought about writing a bot that congratulated active users on > account creation anniversaries and suggested directions for growth. > "Grats X you've been editing for 2 years, here's a picture of a kitten. > Have you thought about doing New Page Patrol?" > > "Grats Y you've been editing for a decade, here's a virtual beer, you've > earned it! Have you thought about applying for adminship?" > > Of course, you'd want to check account account behaviour pretty carefully > first. > > cheers > stuart > > -- > ...let us be heard from red core to black sky > > On 21 February 2017 at 14:33, Pine W <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Kerry, >> >> Thanks for the ideas. Jonathan Morgan, Aaron Halfaker, and I have had >> more than one conversation about wikiprojects as a way to engage with new >> editors. Unfortunately, there are a lot of derelict wikiprojects. >> >> I have some ideas about how to improve the training system for ENWP and >> Commons in particular. But that's different from the motivation issue, >> which I think is more challenging. With enough money and time, the training >> system can be upgraded. I'm not sure if the same is true for motivation. I >> have the impression that student Wikimedians are mostly motivated by grades >> (hence the precipitous decline in their participation after their Wikipedia >> Education Program class ends), and many other people are motivated by money >> or PR (hence we get a lot of people engaging in promotionalism or PR >> management.) It's not clear to me how someone goes from being wiki-curious >> to feeling motivated enough to contribute for years. There are many other >> hobbies that are lower stress, healthier, offer more opportunities for >> socializing, and offer a friendlier environment. I think that some >> Wikimedians are motivated by desire to promote or share their interest in a >> particular topic, which might keep content creators interested and engaged >> for years, particularly if they meet people with similar interests. But >> it's a phase change to go from being a content creator or curator, to >> taking on roles that benefit other individual Wikimedians, or broad >> cross-sections of the Wikimedia community. We could use all of those kinds >> of good-faith long-term contributors. >> >> Perhaps we should include information in our training about "career >> paths" for Wikimedians who would like to develop their skills and/or move >> into new roles? >> >> I'm not sure what else to suggest. I find it challenging to figure out >> how to motivate people to want to contribute productively for years, and >> there are some roles for which lengthy experience is an informal but >> significant prerequisite for acceptance and/or success. I'd like to see >> more people make that journey. >> >> Pine >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Kerry Raymond <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Pine, >>> >>> It sounds to me that there are two separate parts to your question. >>> >>> One relates to the survival of such editors to being ongoing active >>> editors. The second seems to relate to recruiting them and perhaps >>> upskilling them for specific purposes, eg administration, guild of copy >>> editors, and whatever initiatives you have in mind. >>> >>> The first question probably relates to being able to get them better >>> informed about the policies of Wikipedia at least in relation to the area >>> of their contributions and how to engage with the community because it is >>> the abrasive interaction with the community that seems to drive people away. >>> >>> The second probably relates to raising awareness of WikiProjects and >>> other collaborative initiatives. (Obviously all of WP is collaborative, but >>> some things require higher levels of coordination and I think this might be >>> what you are referring to). I think probably needs some analysis of the >>> nature of their contributions and/or their topics of interest in order to >>> introduce them to targetted WikiProjects etc that seem logical trajectories >>> for them. The mistake we make constantly in onboarding newbies is >>> overwhelming them with information (think of the standard Twinkle welcome >>> templates) because "THEY NEED TO KNOW THIS" instead of what they want to >>> know "how do I do this current thing I am trying to do". For similar >>> reasons I think any attempts to draw them into particular >>> projects/initiatives should be highly targeted, not too frequent, and based >>> on what their interests seem to be rather where someone else would like >>> them to work. (I think we should avoid the mindset of "I need to recruit >>> some cannon fodder"). Having got their attention, someone probably has to >>> hold their hand through whatever upskilling is needed to get them >>> productive. Just pointing people at a Project page isn't helpful, there >>> needs to be some human outreach and shepherding. >>> >>> In some idealised universe, we should see Wikipedians as being on a >>> learning journey, where (through analysis of past contributions and >>> interactions) we are tracking them against a series of learning objectives >>> (as we do with coursework curriculum "they have passed this unit, let's >>> offer them some new units that build on that"). So, using newbies as an >>> example, we look for some threshold of surviving-edits that demonstrate >>> skills like "add text", "format text", "add list element", "make links", >>> "make piped links", "add citation", "add templated citations", "use a >>> template", "edit an infobox", "add an infobox", write on their talk page, >>> write on an article talk page, write on another user's talk page, add to >>> their own user page, etc. The idea being to suggest as various competencies >>> are attained how to add a new skill to their repertoire. Once they have >>> acquired the basic how-to skills, we could look at the suggestions of where >>> they might apply these skills and how to specialise their skills in various >>> ways. >>> >>> Kerry >>> >>> Sent from my iPad >>> >>> On 21 Feb 2017, at 2:49 am, Pine W <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Research-l, >>> >>> A human resources problem that I am experiencing is a shortage of human >>> resources of community members who are willing, available, and have the >>> skills to work on a variety of useful initiatives. Is anyone on this list >>> aware of research that talks about motivations of long-term contributors? >>> In particular, I'd be interested in research that suggests ways to convert >>> productive, relatively new editors (say, 50-500 edits) into long-term >>> community members who are likely to develop into long-term, productive >>> Wikimedians. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Pine >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wiki-research-l mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wiki-research-l mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wiki-research-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki-research-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l > >
_______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
