User:Alise boal/reflection

Is Wikipedia as welcoming as it claims to be? Wikipedia Education students may beg to differ. It seems rare for a student to remain active to any extent in the community after their term ends and even less likely that students will become involved and dedicated Wikipedians. Reflecting on my experience of contributing to Wikipedia as a part of Wiki Education this semester, I argue that the Wikipedia community underutilizes the affordances and features of the platform designed to build community and retain newcomers, and that more interactions with veteran Wikipedians increase the likelihood that students will continue as community members and contributors. Kraut et al.’s design claims illustrate the potential of the affordances and features as well as they ways in which they are being underutilized.

After deciding that I wanted to contribute to Fan Activism, it quickly became apparent that the information was outdated. The article appears to have been created by two student users in a Wiki Education class at York University sometime between Thursday September 20, 2018 and Monday, December 10, 2018. Through the following years, the article was edited mostly by bots and was the subject of a Wiki Education course a second time before I began working on it. It is clear that there was very little substantial or recent work done before I began my contribution. I could not solicit feedback on the article from those who had previously contributed— those students are long gone. This showcases a larger problem with the Wikipedia Education platform. Students rarely continue as Wikipedians after their class is finished, despite the original intentions of the program.

In theory, the Wikipedia Education platform is the perfect method for recruiting and retaining newcomers. There is a guaranteed group of users present—their existence in the class is a commitment to participate in the community, or at least to contribute to articles. There are other advantages. One design claim, by Kraut et al., explains that “providing potential new members with an accurate and complete picture of what the members’ experience will be once they join increases the fit of those who join.” Allowing professors, and in our case an experienced Wikipedian, to provide a holistic and accurate view of the platform, as well as relay past students experiences, should increase the fit of students as they join.

Additionally, a design claim details how “providing easy-to-use tools for finding and tracking work that needs to be done increases the amount that gets done.” I found this to be a great strength of the Wiki Education program. The class page simplified the experience, concentrating many resources and links in one place and making training and tasks accessible. Even when we were peer reviewing classmate articles, the class page had a process that allowed you to assign yourself articles and walked you through reviewing step by step. The page also showed each of our usernames and profiles, as well as our recent work and work that was yet to be completed. When we were assigned trainings outside of class, the number of complete trainings would appear by our usernames. This plays into another claim by Kraut et al.: “providing easy-to-use tools for finding and tracking work that needs to be done increases the amount that gets done.” I felt this to be true—when I was behind or knew I had edits to make or a task to complete, knowing I could go to the class page and find the link, instructions, and a tutorial within moments made me more likely to complete the work.

Despite all of the pros I saw in the program, when Professor Reagle was polling the class, it became apparent that there were very few, if any, interactions between our students and advanced Wikipedians this semester. While I cannot name the reason for this, I feel as though this contributed to a larger sense of disconnect from the greater Wikipedia community, which I shared. Kraut et al. tell us that “providing opportunities for members to engage in personal conversation increases bonds-based commitment in online communities.” While Wikipedia is one of the kinder places I’ve encountered on the internet, I do not, as we conclude the semester, feel enticed to stay and continue editing. It is my assumption that increased personal interactions would help me feel as though I was part of the Wikipedia community.

I was, though, greeted on my talk page by a Wiki Education representative almost immediately after joining the class. They welcomed me and wished me well before offering support and guidance should I have any questions. They also provided links to a myriad of resources like the student training library, FAQ, and. The representative acknowledged my status as a newcomer without being patronizing, making the interaction especially impactful. Because of the rapid nature of this interaction and its pleasantness, it exemplified Kraut et al.’s statement that: “when newcomers have friendly interactions with existing community members soon after joining a community, they are more likely to stay longer and contribute more." We also see another conclusion by the scholars come into play here: “assigning the responsibilities of having friendly interactions with newcomers to particular community members increases the frequency of these interactions.” I noticed other members of the class with the same message on their page. Because someone was assigned to do this, we all were welcomed quickly. This, though, was the only welcome I received, and moreover was the only interaction I had on Wikipedia with a non-classmate that I did not initiate. I am led to believe that had this person not been assigned to leave a welcoming note, I may not have received any.

We, as a class, were also instructed to introduce ourselves on our user pages soon after setting up our accounts. The level to which we disclosed was up to us, with some users adding a host of great details via userboxes and images. Others, like me, kept it simple, sharing only that “as part of User:Reagle's online community class, I will be contributing to Wikipedia and reflecting on the experience on a user page here.” Wikipedia having the option to introduce oneself and further interact on the talk page of a user has the potential to fulfill Kraut et al.’s design claim that “encouraging newcomers to reveal themselves publicly in profiles or introduction threads gives existing group members a basis for conversation and reciprocation with them and increases interaction between old-timers and newcomers.” Because only the Wiki Education representative and my classmates introduced themselves, I feel this affordance of the app was underutilized in contributing to the retention of newcomers. If older members, not responsible for the class community or in the class, came and said welcome, responded to my introduction, or introduced themselves in turn, perhaps this would have developed into the reciprocal interaction Kraut et al. describe and created an additional connection that encouraged me to stay. I thought, initially, that the lack of response may have been due to my lack of detailed introduction, but others seemed to have the same experience despite their more detailed pages.

I did have two positive interactions with more experienced Wikipedians that I initiated. After drafting my article contribution and getting approval to move it to the mainspace, I did so and added a note on the talk page requesting edits and feedback. I never received anything there outside of peer evaluations from my classmates, so I wrote on the talk pages of Wikipedians who had edited related pages and written on the attached talk pages. I sent 5 messages and heard back from two Wikipedians, one who had written on the talk page for the WikiProject Pop music and one who had written on the talk page of K-pop. Both interactions were pleasant. One Wikipedian welcomed me to the platform and both told me to keep up the good—or great—work. I did receive valuable feedback from one of the interactions that I used to update my contribution, as well as general reassurance that I was on par with Wikipedia standards.

These interactions showcase Kraut et al.'s design claim: “performance feedback—especially positive feedback—can enhance to perform tasks.” I was excited when I saw that two Wikipedians had replied, and even more excited to see that their feedback was overall positive. It motivated me to make further improvements to the article as recommended by one Wikipedian. This experience aligns with the work of Zhu et al., who explain that “positive feedback and social messages increase people’s general motivation to work.” With more experiences like these, perhaps I would be more integrated and maybe even consider myself a Wikipedian.

In the end, I rate my experience contributing to Wikipedia this semester highly. I enjoyed my time and found it rewarding, even when accompanied by frustration at the underutilization of the many great features of the platform. I think I will maintain my account and may edit from time to time in the future, even though I do not consider myself a Wikipedian and do not foresee my future participation as frequent. In this way, perhaps the Wiki Education format achieved its goal. I definitely would not have found my way here if not for Online Communities.