You are making an assumption that the strict editorial control and
over-zealous administrative actions are a problem endemic to only English
Wikipedia, the scope of my suggestion were towards all the Indian Language
wikis, in addition to the English wiki. Considering that this thread is on
Wikimediaindia, my context was limited to Indian Editors.

Editor retention has been one of the large problems that all the projects
witness, there have been multiple studies on how to address that very issue.
Going forward, India and the local language projects are a high priority
according to the Strategic plan [1], what Srikanth brought up is a
fundamental problem for retention, not only according to the example he
cited but from talking to new people at our meetups, they described a
complete lack of awareness about why their first entries were deleted, most
of them never followed up afterwards.

Again, I am bringing up Meta here because you assumed that the scope of this
suggestion was only the English Wikipedia, I would wish it to address any
Indian interested in contributing to the projects including
any Indian language projects, the intent was to provide a first-step guide
and a point of reference instead of the brief 7-line welcome template and
a brief mention of the Five pillars, thats employed on the English
Wikipedia. Indians also have the option of contributing in multiple
languages, most however, might not even know about the existence of a local
language project.

This problem is inherent to our system, your wish for maintaining the status
quo would disregard all the attention and importance India has on the
Movement Priorities. The issue is supporting and nurturing the community, I
am arguing for a subdued approach while we build our own local communities.

For example, you tepidly suggested that I go through the archives of ANI to
find similar issues addressed earlier, Most people on the list would know
about the several thousand pages, not to mention hundreds of thousand of
incidents on the English Wikipedia Administrative archives, how can we
expect any newbie to go through something that daunting for the purpose of
making or retaining their edit. The Guideline pages alone number several
hundred pages, dictating everything from the appropriate 3rd party sources
to the usage of quotation marks according to WP:MOS, dispensing things that
matter the most from them is a critical issue for newcomers. People I met
had no idea about the existence of* *WP:NOTE or our BLP policies, but they
were expected to comply with them.

Public outreach is a very important issue, I believe the foundation
undertook the Bookshelf project[2] recently for the same issue to increase
outreach and provide easy assimilation of new wikipedians into the
community. I was thinking of something along the same lines for India.




On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 3:13 AM, Anirudh Bhati <> wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 2:03 AM, theo10011 <> wrote:
> >
> > I beg to differ Anirudh, the issue is that the newbies don't know of
> > or any other place was the reason I suggested the page.
> Finding out about the help desk or simply asking for help is much
> easier for a new user than looking for ideas cross-wiki.  A simple
> welcome template contains instructions to ask for help without even
> having to move from one's talk page.[1]
> > By the same logic,
> > If the newbies could ask their question on Help desk, they could also
> look
> > up the same guidelines and the Noticeboards to see what they did wrong
> and
> > complain appropriately, which would make the entire process redundant.
> Newbies aren't expected to know each and every rule from the day they
> join Wikipedia, you have more experienced users asking them to IAR.
> IAR doesn't mean a free license to do whatever you want, but to learn
> as you go.[2]
> What would make the entire process redundant are administrators who
> would be willing to give appropriate amount of attention to each and
> every contentious issue (esp. those which involve using the blocking
> tool).  Many new users complain of over-zealousness on the part of
> long-term contributors, I can empathize with their position but cannot
> completely shift the blame on to the janitors.
> As the encyclopedia continues to grow so does the amount of data that
> is churned on the project.  Administrators continually end up deleting
> pages within moments of their creation, and get defensive when
> questioned.  They block vandals without appropriate warnings and most
> of the time such blocks go unchallenged because of the nature of the
> edits (overt vandalism).  But sometimes, as it happens with the huge
> amount of backlog, an administrator may perceive tenacious editing as
> disruption and vandalism, and when this happens our problems begin.
> Please go through the archives of the administrators' noticeboard and
> you will find such issues have been discussed over and over again with
> no conclusive solution to the problem.  Conflicts have been escalated
> to the point where the Arbitration Committee has had to issue
> sanctions on old hands resulting in burn out and retirement from the
> project.  And you know what... I'd rather stand by a trusty old admin
> in the lieu of hundreds of whiny newbies who didn't have anything
> constructive to contribute anyway.
> I understand that this may not be the optimal solution, but it's the
> one that has worked for us for years.
> > What
> > I suggested was a centralized page where all the links that might be
> helpful
> > to newbies would be collected together, where they can ask senior editors
> > questions directly or look into issues for them.
> > I suggested Meta for two reason- one to keep it off the English wiki
> since
> > there is no shortage of similar places, and second most of the users
> there
> > are very well-versed in policies and guidelines more than local wikis
> > especially Indian Language Wikis, something of an "outside context" might
> be
> > useful to newcomers.
> Please follow through with your project but I don't see much use for
> it from an English Wikipedia standpoint.  English Wikipedia had and
> still has the best available resources to assist new users and help
> them cope with conflicts.
> > I agree with Srikanth, there is a cultural difference, besides a
> different
> > language there is rather large repository of policies of guidelines that
> > might seem daunting to newcomers, we want to provide access as easily as
> > possible. We have met many wikimedians who want to get involved in the
> > movement on meetups, mailing lists - this page would act as a first step
> > page for all of them, we can refer them to it to read up and ask
> questions
> > if they have issues. What I would like to see is, something similar to
> adopt
> > a user program so that experienced editors could adopt and guide new
> comers.
> > Regards
> I am all for courteous dealings with new users, but no amount of
> cajoling usually placates someone who has decided to game the
> system.[3]
> Please explain to me how cultural differences result in a breakdown of
> communication to the extent that a user gets blocked for disruption?
> In the immediate case, it appears to me that Yogesh Khandke handled
> himself quite well (and has sufficiently proven that the blocks were
> made out of process, except that he didn't' challenge the block
> earlier).  I don't see how an Indian community-run service for new
> users would have helped resolve the manner more equitably than a
> single old-hand noticing an unjustified block.
> I have no issues with community building exercises, but most of them
> turn into cliques that outgrow their intended use.[4]
> >
> > Salmaan
> [1] {{helpme}} on
> ([[Template:Welcome]])
> [2] #5 on
> ([[Wikipedia:Five pillars]] - IAR.
> [3] ([[WP:GAME]])
> [4]
> anirudh
> > On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 1:34 AM, Anirudh Bhati <>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 11:48 PM, theo10011 <> wrote:
> >> > Interesting point Srikanth, we can address part of the issue.
> >> > I propose something like "Don't bite the newcomers" page, pref.
> located
> >> > on
> >> > Meta where new Wikimedians especially the ones from India can ask
> >> > question
> >> > to more experienced editors. It would be along the lines of Admin
> >> > noticeboard, RfC page in terms of structure but any experienced editor
> >> > would
> >> > be able to answer a newcomers question. They can watch their edit
> >> > history
> >> > and even promote our "adopt a user" feature by experienced editors.
> >> > We can announce this page on the India Mailing list, newcomers at
> >> > wiki-meetups, regularly for any new comers. For a centralized location
> I
> >> > would suggest locating it on Meta considering the experienced user
> base
> >> > and
> >> > the multilingual community there. Any thoughts?
> >> >
> >>
> >> I wouldn't attribute this to cultural differences. Let's be clear on
> >> something, it's not only users from India who complain about rogue
> >> admins and editors.
> >>
> >> [[w:en:WP:HD]] is still the best resource for new users to seek advice.
> >>
> >> Creating a redundant page on meta serves no purpose.  The India
> >> noticeboard is a responsive place to seek advice if the user finds
> >> himself/herself embroiled in a dispute over India-related subjects.
> >>
> >> I do understand that a significant number of new pages patrollers,
> >> recent changes patrollers and some administrators are impatient with
> >> new users and that leads to unnecessary escalation of conflict.
> >> However, the underlying issue is much deeper and not exclusive for
> >> editors from India.
> >>
> >> anirudh
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
> >
> >
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list

Reply via email to