User:Isobelpowell/Report

Although I have always been an avid Wikipedia user, it never occurred to me to make my own contributions. Becoming a part of the Wikipedia community has allowed me to recognize its importance, whilst identifying areas where I had trouble as a newcomer. I initially struggled committing to a topic that I would find worthwhile. I wanted to choose something familiar to me, a concept that I could connect to in some way. I found myself relating to an identity-based commitment in bettering the ‘Gum Wall’ Wikipedia page. My choice aligns with the fact that I am native to Seattle, have visited the tourist spot many times, and was surprised that the article was only at the ’stub’ status. Identity-based commitment refers to feeling a part of the community and wanting to help fulfill its mission. I felt that adding and updating the information on this page could help readers who are planning on visiting the Gum Wall or who simply wanted to learn more about it. My affective connection to the topic motivated me to begin editing and improving the page.

Below are actionable advice items that I would suggest the Wikipedia community and Wikimedia Foundation implement for a better user experience:

1.	I advise that Wikipedia engages in active recruitment of editors by advertising the importance of their community through reliable sources.

Given the reach that Wikipedia has in informing the public and the number of years this community has been active, I’m surprised that I have never been directly asked to contribute to the site.

To continue curating a reliable and informative site, I propose that Wikipedia promotes their community through advertisements. Perhaps these can include famous subject matter experts (i.e., think a commercial featuring Neil deGrasse Tyson referencing a Wiki article on the Milky Way) who speak to the importance of a site like Wikipedia and call for other experts to help the site grow. These ads would influence users to join, but also emphasize why the work they will be doing on the site is an important task.

With advertising, it is important that Wikipedia clearly states what being a contributor to their community entails. This idea is conveyed within Kraut and Resnick’s book Building Successful Online Communities, as they claim 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” (200). Kraut and Resnick describe this idea of self-selection, where a clear description of the community and what goes into it attracts the right people and deters the wrong ones.

'''2.	I advise that Wikipedia creates interactive groups for newcomers. ''' Wikipedia is a household name. It’s a website that receives heavy traffic daily. With this, being an inexperienced newcomer to the Wikipedia community was daunting for me. I was nervous that I would not become accustomed to the interface and that I could potentially ruin articles with my edits. I recognize that the walkthrough guides provided to me through Wiki Education and the ability to turn to my course instructors in times of need are not the same resources that every newcomer to Wikipedia receives.

In this case, I would advocate that every newcomer is added to a relatively small group of others who joined at a similar time. The group can be useful in the process of socialization, where newcomers are taught the norms and regulations and develop a better sense of their role in the community. This could be done through requiring completion of practice modules and watching explanatory videos. The group would be assigned a moderator of sorts, one in which acts as a reference and resource for any questions. This represents a more institutionalized approach to socialization. Newcomers are segregated from the rest of the community during the initiation process so that they can complete necessary training and receive feedback on their progress.

3.	Wikipedia should assign a moderator to approve the movement of material out of a user’s sandbox and into a live article.

Giving every new user access to editing Wikipedia is both a significant tactic and immense pressure for the site. Wikipedia integrates unsocialized newcomers from day one, making it an inclusive online community. However, this easy accessibility is where there is potential for damage.

As a newcomer, I appreciated the ‘Sandbox’ feature of Wikipedia. Wikipedia understands the complexity of contribution for those who are just starting out, and the sandbox acts as a mode of protection from harm and a safe spot for learning and experimentation. But the process of transferring information out of the sandbox and into the live article is an area in which damage is bound to occur for the community. Source editing can seem unusual, links can become broken, or critical content can become displaced. I believe that assigning a neutral moderator to provide oversight on a user’s sandbox information before it is entered into the live article will be beneficial. This moderator should have no previous affiliation to the topic at hand, but instead is simply checking for user’s success in creating appropriate Wikipedia content (i.e., of neutral tone, citing credible sources, no copyright), therefore engaging in a proactive response to moderation. This is another way of easing the anxiety of inexperienced newcomers, whilst increasing the overall cohesion of the community.

As someone with no previous experience participating in an online community, Wikipedia was a challenge, but enjoyable. I feel accomplished knowing that I helped contribute to a page that may receive viewers from all parts of the world. I am intrigued to see where my peers in the Wikipedia community can offer me advice or support with my article. And finally, I do believe Wikipedia is a place that I will return to as an active user. Providing updated information on topics of my own interests or that are personal to me is something I look forward to pursuing in the future.