User:Kathylamb7/Report

Wikipedia Experience From the Eyes of a Non-Wikipedian Turned Wikipedian
Joining Wikipedia, even through an academically-guided course, was an eye-opening and integrative experience surrounding the theories and concepts covered in our discussion seminars. This reflection will be divided into three subsections: my personal experience with the Wikipedia community, theories and concepts that were found to be useful, and advice for the Wikipedia community and Wikimedia Foundation as a result from my experience and knowledge learned throughout this course.

Personal Experience
To begin with, my personal experience with joining and working with Wikipedia has been eye-opening, to say the least. Wikipedia's information encompasses the contribution of people from different backgrounds, interests, ethnicities, education levels, and areas of access. Simply put, those who choose to contribute are welcome to, so long as they adhere to the guidelines and norms that Wikipedia has created and put forth. In joining Wikipedia, I was first asked to join the classroom dashboard, immediately integrating me into a community of other students taking COM 482. The next steps were to familiarize ourselves with Wikipedia's functions and norms. The "activities" listed in our course Dashboard effectively consolidated this information and presented it to ourselves in a systematic manner as we moved through the different stages of our next community integration: creating or editing a Wikipedia article.

Not only did we need to identify which stubs we wanted to work on, but how to best approach it. Aside from the difficulty and confusion of assigning articles to ourselves in the classroom sector of Wikipedia, we needed to understand the sandbox and user talk functions of Wikipedia. After a bit of exploring, guided by the Wikipedia tutorial activities, I understood the basic layout of what we had to do as follows (chart on the right). Granted, this was still new to me, but it helped understand why this structure was useful to the integrity of Wikipedia to a non-Wikipedian.

When others made edits to my sandbox draft of the assigned article (Acacia Winery), I felt included and helpful. My work was being noticed and if I was doing something that strayed from the goal of Wikipedia articles or was lacking in areas, feedback from experienced users was welcomed. Wikipedia taught me that identity was important to users, or some form of it, to ensure the collaborative community. The integrity of the article and providing in a neutral, direct, and concise tone was of the upmost importance, but above all, Wikipedia values its ability to be flexible through change. Especially in the format that we are learning how to utilize online platforms to communicate, Wikipedia taught me that remote interaction can still be effective. Though Wikipedia, in my opinion, is certainly more focused on an identity-based bond (BSOC, Week 3), it touches on much more than that as an online community.

Useful Theories and Concepts
The course referenced to Robert E. Kraut and Paul Resnick's book, "Building Successful Online Communities", as the design claims supported theories and concepts mentioned in our supplemental case studies to better understanding the content. There are 5 sections in the book, of which there are a couple design claims that are directly relevant to my Wikipedia experience.

Encouraging Contribution to Online Communities (DC 1, 9, 12)
Design Claim 1: "Making the list of needed contributions easily visible increases the likelihood that the community will provide them." This concept was well executed in the project sorting throughout the platform. Stubs are Wikipedia articles that require the most work and cover a wide variety of topics.

Design Claim 9 & 12: "Requests from high-status people in the community lead to more contribution than anonymous requests or requests from low-status members", "People are more likely to comply with a request when they see that other people have also complied." DC 9 and 12 focus on the authority aspect of work. Though Wikipedia is mostly community driven, project prioritization and seeing that the process works encourages newcomers to contribute.

Encouraging Commitment to Online Communities (DC 4)
Design Claim 4: "Providing a collection of individuals with a name or other indicator that they are members of a common group increases their identity-based commitment to the community." As aforementioned, Wikipedia focuses on identity-based commitment through "signing" a message and associating changes with each user. The significance of this is that usernames are tied to the choice of creating a user page as a sub-page of Wikipedia, increasing the feeling of commitment within this platform.

Regulating Behavior in Online Communities (DC 3)
Design Claim 3: "Consistently applied moderation criteria, a chance to argue one’s case, and appeal procedures increase the legitimacy and thus the effectiveness of moderation decisions. In Wikipedia's case, revision histories are tied to the user that made them. If there are inappropriate instances or norm breaking in the editing sector, other Wikipedians are able to self-moderate the content and talk to the user about them.

Advice to Wikipedia
Wikipedia has formed a successful community that surrounds many of Kraut and Resnick's design claims (though not fully referenced in this report). Though successful, it still has areas of improvement. Regarding Wikipedia's active users, I might recommend that Wikipedia focus on a better reward/commitment system that what they currently follow. Employing DC 17 from Chapter 3 may encourage users to develop a bonds-based commitment, as many existing users may lose their drive to stay in the community if their intrinsic motivation fades as the cost of contributing outweighs the benefits. Wikipedia is open to the public and covers a wide range of topics up for contribution and discussion--a large potential member base. However, the active users are what maintains Wikipedia's usefulness amongst other similar communities.

Furthermore, I would advise Wikipedia to focus on explicitly stating their norms in the guideline, though point out that what is stated is not fully exhaustive as norms change with the growth of members. Referencing the Ubuntu Code 2.0 and GNOME Code of Conduct, it would be beneficial for Wikipedia (as it is a large and stable community), to follow a similar format instead of what they currently have (Policies & Guidelines). This will set clear expectations and reduce alienation of new members, which may encourage more directed growth and reputation rebranding.

As a new member who has worked extensively in article editing and adopting the norms of this new community, it would be beneficial for Wikipedia to strongly consider these suggestions. Not only are these concepts backed by Kraut and Resnick's design claims, but they are supported by external documentation of other successful communities' policies. Incorporating these changes into Wikipedia would not only make it more welcoming to newcomers, but may also increase active participation aligned to Wikipedia's goals.