Stripping out a long email trail ...

I am not advocating lowering the BLP bar as there are genuine legal needs to 
prevent libel.

What I am advocating is not letting new users do their first edits in “high 
risk” articles. When I do training, I pick exercises for the group which 
deliberately take place in quiet backwaters of Wikipedia, eg add schools to 
local suburb articles. Such articles have low readership and low levels of 
watchers and no BLP considerations, i.e. low risk articles. If the newbie first 
edit is a bit of a mess, probably no reader will see it before it is fixed by a 
subsequent edit. They will be able to get help from me to fix it before anyone 
is harmed by it and before anyone reverts them. 

The “organic” newbie can dive into any article. It would be a very interesting 
research question to look at reverts and see if we can develop risk models that 
predict which articles are at higher risks of reverted edits (e.g. quality 
rating, length, type of article eg BLP, level of readership, number of active 
watchers, etc) and there might be separate models specifically for newbies 
revert risk and female newbie revert risk. 

Or we just simply calculate the proportion of  reverted edits and just use 
declare anything over some threshold as “high risk” and not bother finding out 
what the article characteristics are. We could also calculate what is the 
newbie revert rate. 

Then we have something actionable. We could treat the high risk articles (by 
predictive model or straight stats) as semi-protected and divert newbies from 
making direct edits. Or at least warn them before letting them loose. For that 
matter, warn any user if they are entering into a high conflict zone.

When you learn to drive a car, you normally start in the quiet streets,  not a 
busy high speed freeway, not narrow winding roads without guard rails up a 
mountain. Why shouldn’t we take the same attitude to Wikipedia? Start where it 
is safe.

Kerry
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Reply via email to