User:Mhdav9/Report

This past quarter, as a student enrolled in COM 481 Online Communities at the University of Washington, was the first time that I had used Wikipedia in a capacity greater than skimming articles. Throughout my experience using the platform, combined with learning about the service through my coursework, I have a better understanding of what makes online communities successful. Open collaboration systems like Wikipedia must recruit active newcomers and create ways to retain them in order to stay afloat. With Wikipedia, however, these newcomers must also be aware of the norms of the community before being able to participate to the same extent as seasoned contributors. WikiEdu, the service used by me and my classmates, set us up for success by doing just that. Following the learning modules we were able to gain a better understanding of how to be proper members of the community. A great way for Wikipedia to improve their community is through the protection of newcomers, recruitment of contributors, and retention of those who go through learning modules such as WikiEdu.

As a newcomer to Wikipedia, the WikiEdu service allowed me to progress at a rate beneficial to myself while also ensuring that I learned the essentials to become a proper member. The WikiEdu community is a great form of protection when it comes to newcomers. Due to the sandbox feature, my classmates and I were able to learn about Wikipedia’s norms through hands-on participation without actually making any official changes. Because Wikipedia is an open collaboration platform, this is an important step. However, despite this precaution, we weren’t restricted from making actual changes on pages during this time. There’s a place for newcomers to learn, but it’s not required, which is where contribution can get messy. My first suggestion would be to implement progressive access control. Until students have finished the WikiEdu modules they shouldn’t be able to make changes to articles. While it might affect those who choose to contribute, forcing students to wait ensures that no damage is done to the Wikipedia community.

I’ve used Wikipedia several times before, but didn’t know that there was a way as straightforward as WikiEdu to go about participating in the community. If I weren’t part of COM 481, I probably would have never found out how easy it is to contribute. Resources such as this one, that provide structure and training, should be available to everyone. It would solve the issue of people being unaware of community norms. Additionally, knowing that other people are going through the same learning processes can ease the stress of possibly making mistakes or not knowing exactly what to do all the time. This socialization tool can make the community less intimidating. While Wikipedia requires visitors, it also requires participants who are willing to contribute and visiting the website doesn’t make it obvious how to do so.

Because I had access to the WikiEdu platform and knew that my classmates were going through the same experience as me, I had a positive experience learning about the Wikipedia community. I enjoyed researching and editing the “Camden Snow Bowl” article because it was something that I am passionate about and as a student in COM 481 I was provided with the right resources. While the WikiEdu resource can be seen as a barrier, the time investment might actually be beneficial. It’s essential that once Wikipedia has recruited and trained contributors, that they retain them – at least for a little white. There’s always going to be turnover but by implementing the suggestions above retention could be increased. Those who go through the learning modules will have invested their time and will become more beneficial members who choose to stay longer. Wikipedia has to provide a positive first experience and show new users their way through the community.

When looking something up on the Internet it’s likely that the search results will include a Wikipedia page. However, it’s also likely that many have been told that the resource is unreliable given that anyone is able to write an article. When I was told that in school it never crossed my mind that I could be one of those people making edits. There was a disconnect between those two ideas. However, I now know that the multitude of contributors on Wikipedia checking articles and making edits are ensuring that the service stays reliable. Wikipedia is a unique service that has solidified itself as the superior online encyclopedia given the features and resources they offer but with a few refinements the community can improve.