User:Fuller2019/Report

My experience with Wikipedia has been beneficial in helping me to learn more about online communities. Since Wikipedia is very established, with many contributors, this experience has helped me learn about many different aspects of online communities and how its users are imperative to its success. Going through the WikiEd modules were important in ensuring that I was able to effectively contribute to the site. Without it, I’m sure I would have made many more mistakes while learning the intricate steps of contributing to an article.

In my contribution, I was able to add to the tonic water article where I discussed the negative effects of quinine and provided additional information in the history and uses sections. During this process, I learned the importance of finding reliable resources that adhere to the Wikipedia standard. If information is not taken from a reliable source, then viewers of the article will feel they cannot trust Wikipedia and this could tarnish the reputation of the site. High standards are important because many editors are motivated by helping others and ensuring that users are confident of the information they read. Throughout my experience, I also identified potential ways that Wikipedia could improve their community.

Barnstars were created to give status to members in the community. They increase the motivation of contributors because they are getting recognized for their hard work. While this has helped improve the user’s motivation to contribute valuable information, there are downsides to barnstars as well. One issue is that there is no calibration between the barnstars, and some may get similar recognition for lower grade work than others. If a user feels they have earned a barnstar but don’t receive one, they will likely be discouraged from continuing to contribute. To fix this problem, I would make the barnstars private so that users won’t feel that others are being recognized for less worthy work. Another benefit to this switch would be to reduce the intimidation that might be felt by new members who see users with very high barnstar numbers. This might help drive a higher number of valued contributors to the community. Users will still be motivated because the recognition aspect is still there, but some competitive elements would be reduced.

Another large issue that Wikipedia faces is getting users that are committed to the community and that stay committed. Often users will be passionate about one topic and edit a specific article. After they feel satisfied with their first contribution, they may move on and never edit for Wikipedia again. I would guess that many of my classmates will end up in this situation. A way to increase the number of dedicated contributors would be to focus on bond-based commitment. By creating a space where users can connect with others, they will feel more commitment towards the community. The bonds would help build friendships and a desire to come back and visit. To focus on bonds-based commitment, Wikipedia could make a place that is less formal than an article’s sandbox making it easier and more desirable for users to come together. The current sandboxes are unique because they provide a place for users to practice their edits, but it is a very formal experience with limited personal interaction. Having a place that encourages users get to know each other better should also inspire them to come back and contribute with their friends.

There are many expected norms in the Wikipedia community making it difficult to learn and remember them all. Additionally, it is challenging for users to find them. These challenges make it harder for users to provide useful information to the community. There is also limited oversight when someone doesn’t follow the norms because Wikipedia relies on the user community to give feedback. With this, feedback is tied to the article rather than more broadly and that increases the likelihood that other users may not see the changes. To fix this problem, there should be more moderators to support and enable users to learn from their experience and prior mistakes. I think there are many uninformed users on Wikipedia with good intentions, but don’t know that they are doing something wrong. The moderators can give specific feedback and help improve the future information that is added while enabling users to learn more quickly. Another thing that could help users would be to add a last-minute check list that pops up before you publish an article. The check list could provide key reminders on important things that users should ensure are in their contributions. This would help improve the current articles and ensure that users don’t forget about important norms.

One last suggestion would help all community contributors, especially new users. Newcomers often have a hard time assimilating to a new community when there are a lot of norms. These new users, who have not been socialized to the community, often have a little sense of their role, and don’t know how to effectively contribute. To fix this, all newcomers should be expected to go through the WikiEd program, like our class did. While this socialization is a formal experience, by requiring it, newcomers will be able to fully understand the norms and requirements of contributing to an article. It will help newcomers understand the concrete steps of adding to the community and prevent established users from feeling frustrated at the increase in newcomers. WikiEd is a great start to learning the process and gives users helpful guidance on the information they provide.

Overall Wikipedia is a very well-developed community, but there is always room for improvement. Many of my recommendations focus on the ability of users to better understand the norms because I personally found it hard to keep track of all the rules. Once a user is integrated into the community, it is important for them to keep their commitment. Over the years, Wikipedia has had a decrease in engagement and these recommendations can improve the user involvement and support on-going contributions.