User:Nanderson626/report

Nicole C. Anderson

Wikipedia Report

Admittedly, throughout the entire process of becoming a wikipedian and learning the ropes on how to edit articles, I was still fairly intimidated and confused at times, still requiring help from my instructors on several different aspects. The wikiedu program was very helpful and I couldn’t have imagined what it would’ve been like to edit an article without it. Which is to say that Wikipedia could still use improvement in terms of making the site more accessible to new potential editors and less daunting. For one, I definitely think that there should be a program similar to Wikiedu that's immediately accessible to anyone that creates a wikipedia account. It doesn’t have to be mandatory, but it should be presented as an option for anyone who first joins. Aside from all the technical aspects of learning how to edit and use the code, the program should also have information about the etiquette and norms for wikipedia editors. Without Wikiedu, I don’t think there would’ve been any way for me to learn about what was expected and what was polite to do, such as using the talk function or discussing changes with other editors, without hanging around the website for a long time.

The process of becoming a wikipedian did teach me a lot in general. In the past, I had edited minor details in wikipedia here and there, but never did any big edits. The idea of doing so seemed extremely intimidating to do. Once I first approached editing an article, I had approached it a lot more like writing a research paper or essay. Throughout the process, I was able to realize that wikipedia articles were a lot more nuanced in their organization and required a different way of going about them. I had learned how to use the different templates, citations, and how to properly format an article. I also learned the step by step process that goes into creating an article, not just by going straight to page and editing it right there. I learned about using the sandbox and the etiquette surrounding editing amidst a community of other editors. I thought learning all these skills were valuable not only in that it taught me how to write and interact with a new form of media, but it also taught me how to conduct myself within a specific community and what the rules were within it. While I don’t think I’ll become a devout wikipedian, I feel better knowing that I now have these skills at my disposal.

One thing I thought about a lot was how Wikipedia brought in newcomers, discouraged harmful outsiders, and how successful that effort was overall. I think there’s a pretty hefty barrier to new contributors, given that there’s little to no insight on how to get started or how several of the editing features work. While there is most definitely social proof of activity and clear evidence of people editing and interacting, I don’t think many people ever get that far. Alongside that, many new contributors are just trolls who do silly things when it comes to editing articles. While this may be good for a quick laugh, it does nothing to contribute to any sort of actual community building. From what I’ve seen of the community and from what I’ve heard from other wikipedians, there seems to be a sense of normative commitment to the website. People edit as if it were volunteer work, wanting to contribute and improve upon a database of information. Eventually, the longer people get involved in the community, it seems to eventually evolve into identity or even bonds based commitment, as these people proudly identify themselves as “wikipedians.”

Aside from making the learning process of editing more accessible, I think another way Wikipedia could improve would be by introducing more social incentives. Once I had finally published my finished wikipedia article, I felt an immense sense of pride putting it out there for the world to see. However, I don’t think I felt particularly incentivized to continue editing. In terms of what I think I would find incentivizing, I thought about my experience with fanfiction. (Which is also the site of my possible community identification project) While I was always proud of myself for publishing new work, the thing that always got me coming back was the community response I got from other members. I thrived off of positive feedback and just seeing little numbers go up on how many people liked or viewed my work. I think Wikipedia could implement that, by having a statistics system that shows how many people have seen your article, and even potentially rate it on the fly. While the talk page is a good place for discussion, I think we could also turn into a place of positive feedback as well, where writers could see compliments and ways they themselves could better improve. Alongside that, another system that could is to showcase which articles were just newly created or newly edited. That way, users could peruse these articles and give more immediate feedback to these newly published works. For me, the concept of instant gratification and feedback for all the hard work I did for my article would definitely keep me coming back for more. It’d encourage me to contribute more in order to receive that social incentive of peer approval and status.