WikiProject Editor Retention | |||||||
|
Previous conversations about newbies, all in one place, so we can harvest ideas for solutions and not re-hash them
This is a library of sorts. Open 24/7. No library card is required and no fines will be levied.
Back on July 1, 2012, Dennis Brown said: "I'm seeing a lot of discussion in a lot of place regarding editor retention, but not a coordinated effort. This is that coordinated effort, a way for us to actually do something beside speak out in random venues."
- Wikipedia:First contact
- Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 1#The decline is caused, at least in part, by increasing rejection of good-faith newcomer contributions
- Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 1#Core reasons for good editor dissatisfaction related to content: Unmet need for recognition, Frustration with seeing good work ruined, Exasperation at having to continuously defend completed work
- Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 1#Getting across to newbies quickly and clearly ...
- Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 28#What is editor retention?
- Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 29#A note from some guy
- Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 29#A suggestion for welcoming new editors
- Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 29#My experience as a new wiki editor
- Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 29#SPA Welcome #2--Expanding your Wikipedia experience (SMcCavandish)
- Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 30#The elephant in the room
- Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 30#Loss of core editors
- Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 30#Newcomers and contests
What can we tell new anon users who might be hesitant to register about WMF email policy?
Knowing the answer, could help us persuade anon users to register. Your feedback would be appreciated at this discussion at WP:Village pump WMF. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 04:45, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
How could a WikiProject be more welcoming to new editors?
The WikiProject Vital Articles has a lot of members, but most of them are experienced editors and there isn't a lot of new blood. How should the project be modified to be more welcoming to new editors? CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 12:53, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
- Do you think the project has failed to be receptive to new participants, such as you when you first started participating? How do you think your experience could have been improved? What is the ideal initial engagement in your view? Given the available resources, what approximation of this ideal do you think could be achieved?
- As I'm sure you've observed in the social groups you've seen, there are various reasons why newcomers to a group can have difficulty integrating. Do you see evidence of this occurring in the vital articles WikiProject? Specific issues are probably best discussed on the vital article WikiProject talk page. I've participated a little bit on the talk page so I have some exposure to the project. I'm sufficiently experienced though that I don't require anything more than what occurred: some editors responded to me, and we discussed matters. isaacl (talk) 00:56, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- I think that the project have failed to attract members, which has significantly stuttered the project. The project ideally should encourage editors to edit vital articles and organize efforts to do so. Here's some of the problems that I think could not be easily fixed just by discussions at the project itself:
- Even though lots of people know and complain about the list's idiosyncrasies, most are not bothered to so something about it. I suspect this is because of the complex system and unwritten rules at Wikipedia:Vital articles about how an article should be swapped/removed/added to the list, and that really drives a lot of people away. That's also the reason why most members of the projects are on Wikipedia for 1 yr or older.
- People at WT:VITAL imho is really unwelcoming to change and don't want to actually improving the articles, which is kinda crazy considering the whole purpose of the list is to focus editors' efforts. It has gotten bad enough that I've used the the WikiProject's talk page far more often than it should have been.
- There is no resources about how to write and improve vital articles. Like above, this is because there isn't an organized effort to improve them until now.
- CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 06:05, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- OK, that's a different (though potentially related) issue than the one you initially raised: a group can still be welcoming yet fail to attract new members. But it sounds like you want to change how the project operates, and that will have to be discussed with the project, as projects are just groups of users with common interests who have agreed to work together on initiatives. As with any social group, there isn't a way to compel others to agree with your suggestions. Remember just as no one can decide how you're going to spend your volunteer time on Wikipedia, you can't make those decisions for others, either: you can only rely on the goodwill you've built up to influence other editors.
- One good way to gain social capital is to work on a related set of tasks that can be done alone, or can be spread out across multiple interested persons. If you can work on that steadily and make tangible improvements, you may be able to get more people interested in helping. Some editors are attracted by progress boards and seeing tasks getting (literally or metaphorically) checked off as they are completed. If you show other project members that you are vested in the project's goals and have contributed to its success, they'll generally be more receptive to your ideas. Good luck! isaacl (talk) 06:44, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- I think that the project have failed to attract members, which has significantly stuttered the project. The project ideally should encourage editors to edit vital articles and organize efforts to do so. Here's some of the problems that I think could not be easily fixed just by discussions at the project itself: