User:Ayoung22/Report

Wikipedia is a great platform where people from different backgrounds and experiences can create informative articles for others to read about a variety of topics. There are also Talk pages where editors can collaborate and communicate with one another while creating the article. There are many things that the Wikimedia Foundation does right in this sense. However, there are some ways the platform can be improved. For example, when editors try to insert and make templates using the Visual editing instead of Source editing, it is significantly more difficult. Source editing itself is already difficult because one would need experience using code and using it correctly for the template to show on the actual article. The Visual editing is easier to use as it is more streamlined and comprehensible. However, the Visual editor for inserting templates can be as difficult as just using the Source editor.

When trying to insert a template using the Visual editor, there are specific outlines within the template. However, even with that, the person would still need to code specific things like the numbers. I tried to use the Visual editor first when making an episode recap table for the show Singles Inferno. It can become tedious and confusing even with guidelines, which left me confused and frustrated. In the end, I copied the code of a different show’s table and edited it to fit my show. If Wikipedia had an easier way of implementing edits for newcomers, it would increase the cost of joining the community.

Some of the functions on Wikipedia can now be considered outdated. This includes the editing and creation of articles, as mentioned above. In addition to that, the Talk pages can be more user friendly as well. If the design of a website is good, then it can also increase critical mass. The Talk pages currently have users use the Source editing. If there was a way to make a more aesthetic way of messaging others, like a Reddit message forum, it can possibly lower the cost of joining for newcomers trying to become editors and becoming part of the community. When doing peer reviews and introductions, I was sometimes confused on where to add my comment or if I needed to add it under someone else's comment.

In addition to that, having a more interactive community on more articles can increase early-stage value for the community. Although there are articles with active editors on topics, there are some, like my article, where there was nobody using the Talk pages at all. If Talk pages were more encouraged to be used and newcomers could see an active community working together to create an article, they would also be incentivized to join. This can also work if there was an article assigned to someone so newcomers can have an experienced editor help them check if they were working on it correctly.

Overall, one unique aspect of Wikipedia is its way of bringing together multiples scopes of communities together in one, active space. Usually, for other sites, they would need to make a niche for their community and attract people that are interested in it to create a successful environment. However, for Wikipedia, they have a widespread range of niches, from history to pop culture in South Korea. Yet, it does not deter people because every topic is welcomed to be talked about. Because Wikipedia is one of the biggest online encyclopedias, someone is bound to read an article of a random topic, which is another high reward for contributors, and in turn would make them want to contribute more. Because of this interaction between contributors and casual readers, Wikipedia is a very successful platform as it is.