User:NortheasternFoley/reflection

I never really thought about how all of the articles on Wikipedia got there. Of course, I knew that someone had to write them, but it never registered that those people were normal people like me. Even when I did think about the mysterious personas who edited Wikipedia, the only thing that came to mind was teachers saying not to trust it because anyone could edit it. Still, as an active WikiInfant, I had no idea about the intricacies of the community. I didn't even know it was a community in the first place. And once I did learn of the community, I thought that interactions must happen behind the scenes, though now I know that the community is very public if you know where to look. I initially felt a little panic when it came to choosing our topics. After all, it seems like everything notable is on Wikipedia already. However, once I was able to find an article to improve, it seemed to be alright. I was actually excited to edit the Emma Stebbins article. The original article wasn't bad, but I knew I could add more depth to improve it. Unfortunately, my experiences throughout the semester left me with no desire to continue using Wikipedia. Based on my experience, Wikipedia drives away potential users by not doing enough to welcome or retain newcomers or to protect against them.

Recruitment, Selection and Socialization
Wikipedia is a platform that does very little to recruit new members. It is a little scary how easily you can sign up for a Wikipedia account and start editing the site. The people who do have an account have different reasons for doing so. As Kohn writes, “If our goal is quality, or a lasting commitment to value or behavior, no artificial incentive can match the power of intrinsic motivation.” Intrinsic motivation is seemingly the best way to predict commitment to a community. However, my motivations for joining Wikipedia were entirely extrinsically motivated. Beyond getting a good grade in this class, I never would have considered editing Wikipedia. I much preferred to stay a WikiInfant. Still, I moved past this stage to become a WikiChild and started to edit Wikipedia, even though I initially had no idea of what I was doing.

The most socialization I got about Wikipedian practices was from in class. According to Kraut, “explicit rules and guidelines increase the ability for community members to know the norms, especially when it is less clear what others think is acceptable.” I will say that Wikipedia has very clear and well-documented guidelines. But the policies and guidelines page can be overwhelming for a new user. In our class, we were lucky that we got to watch tutorials from the WikiEducation Foundation. However, if Wikipedia wants to make sure that all of their users are knowledgeable about basic guidelines, then Wikipedia should make users go through a tutorial before they can start editing. This would lead to more knowledgeable users and it would act as a selective measure. I’m sure many new users would not want to go through the tutorial, so the ones who finish it would be more dedicated to Wikipedia. Additionally, Kraut says “when old-timers provide newcomers formal mentorship, the newcomers become more committed to the community, learn how to behave in it, and contribute more.” Through the extent of our class, Professor Reagle acted as our Wikipedia mentor, along with User:Shalor if you had any interactions with her (I did not). However, no one unassociated with our class reached out to me and offered me any advice. Which leads me to what I believe is Wikipedia's biggest problem: retention.

Retention
Of the over 37 million Wikipedia accounts, only around 137,000 are actively editing. Additionally, as cited in Kraut, 60% of registered editors in Wikipedia never make another edit after their first 24 hours of participating. What makes users so likely to leave Wikipedia? Is it that they are not intrinsically motivated to edit the site? Do they not have the time? Or were they repulsed by their personal experiences on Wikipedia? After my own experiences throughout the semester, I would be happy to add the retired template to my page and log out forever. The biggest frustration I had with Wikipedia was not the editing process, but the community engagement level. And for me, that level was zero. Kraut writes “when newcomers have friendly interactions with existing community members soon after joining a community, they are more likely to stay longer and contribute more.” He also writes that “performance feedback- especially positive feedback- can enhance motivation to perform tasks.” Throughout the editing process, I received neither of those, despite reaching out for help on multiple occasions. The first user I reached out to was User:Aquarian.librarian. This user was the last on the Emma Stebbins page to make any significant changes. However, she never responded and when looking into her user contributions, I found that she hasn’t edited anything since May. I figured that I wouldn’t be getting any response from this user, but she was the only recent user to make any changes to the page.

I decided to go a different route and reach out to a WikiProject that the article was a part of. On the WikiProject Women's History talk page, I left a message requesting someone to review my article, but no one responded. In fact, a couple more people later added comments to the talk page, but no one acknowledged my post. It was very disheartening. After hearing about how enthusiastic the Wikipedian community was, I thought that there would be more of a response. I know that I picked a niche topic (I guess lesbian sculptors from the 1800s don't have much traction), but so did other people in class. While I know many of my classmates were frustrated with their interactions with Wikipedians, I began to wish that someone would revert my edits and say something negative on my talk page, just to get some interaction.

In the end, I only had one interaction on Wikipedia, and it was when we had to give WikiLove to a Wikipedian. I decided to give WikiLove to User:Alanna the Brave. She is part of the Women in Red Project, which I think is really cool. Within a day of me posting on her talk page, she very kindly answered me saying thank you and invited me to join the Women in Red Project. While I was happy about this interaction, I think it came too late into my Wikipedian experience. At this point, I was frustrated that no one would talk to me and I had already decided to quit Wikipedia after this class.

Protection
Protection against newcomers was also something that I think Wikipedians failed at in concern to my article. Kraut wrote that “sandboxes both speed up the learning process for newcomers and reduce the harm to the community that newcomers might otherwise cause.” I agree with this. It was very comforting to have a safe space to write and edit my article without disrupting the greater Wikipedia. I felt like I understood how to work Wikipedia better after editing in the sandbox. I would say that Wikipedia is successful with this and I like that there is essentially a notepad where we can work undisturbed. However, the problem came when I moved my article to the main space. I was shocked that no experienced Wikipedians looked over my article. I rewrote the entire thing and added photos. You think people would notice. While I had the supervision of Professor Reagle, I could have easily been a vandal and added complete nonsense to the page. While yes, I am happy that my article has survived the main space, it is a bit scary how easy it was to just delete and replace people’s work.

Conclusion
I think that it says something that Wikipedia does not have a high retention rate. With most users leaving after their first edits, Wikipedia doesn't do a good enough job welcoming newcomers. Though perhaps this works best for Wikipedia. Perhaps their inattentiveness is a screening process in itself. After all, those left behind typically have a strong connection with the site. I will admit, that I think that it takes a particular type of person to become really invested in the community and I am not it. However, even as a temporary user, I think I would have enjoyed my experience more if I had been welcomed into the community in the first place. It’s a shame too because I’m actually very proud of my article and I think it’s good. However, if Wikipedia does not start providing a more welcoming environment for newcomers then they drive away good potential users away.