User:Pjuan8/Report

I found that although the concept of Wikipedia had good intentions, I do not find it reasonable that anybody can: 1.) sign-up to make a Wikipedia account, 2.) edit/revise information at their leisure, and 3.) create new articles without prior verification. The first thing that I had an issue with is that it does not matter who can sign-up for Wikipedia, meaning that anyone who has access to a computer or phone can sign-up for Wikipedia. One issue that I have with this is the intentions behind the user who is signing up for an account. I would find it more appealing and useful that people verify themselves, whether they are a college student/professor, a medical professional, or from any other profession that needs reputable sources. As for the college students, I am still a little hesitant and weary that a person such as myself is allowed to edit and revise information when I am still continuously learning the information. The second issue that I had was that anybody can edit/revise information at their leisure. With my experience, I found how easy it was to edit an article and make it live almost instantaneously. Although this may be good in some cases, my suggestion for Wikipedia is for them to change this process and require verification before making changes to an article live. Similarly to how I had to receive the approval from my teacher to make my edits live, this would assist in accurate and informational changes being published.

This change ties in with my last issue where anyone can create new articles without prior verification. Along the lines, if a random user wanted to create a new article and publish it, they could. Although there is a verification process set in place after an article is published, I think it would be helpful that articles need prior verification before making it live. This way it would deter people who have bad intentions of wanting to create useless articles. Outside of these major suggestions, my last suggestion for Wikipedia would be to make the website more user friendly for those who do want to edit and create articles. I found it confusing and difficult to navigate the source editing and using the talk pages to communicate with other users.

Overall, my experience with Wikipedia was somewhat difficult to understand and comprehend. Even with the lessons that were provided, I still had a tough time trying to add information and make edits that were reasonable for Wikipedia’s standards. The article that I edited was visual communication which was rated a S-class, which had some relevant information, but had information that to my knowledge, lacked importance. From participating in this project, the biggest thing I learned was the difficulty in trying to understand the different articles that I used and try to paraphrase in my own words, without adding a sense of bias. I found that the major thing I am unable to comprehend is the talk pages when it is in the source editing mode. The issue with this, is that it gets me overwhelmed and I start to get lost in how to properly use the talk page. One upside to adding articles and submitting edits, it seems like a team project due to the help of other users that are on Wikipedia, not necessarily the people who work for Wikipedia, but also the random users like myself. I learned that it can useful (despite the difficulty to contribute on it) to read talk pages to see what other people believe is missing from the article and improved based on that.

In order for Wikipedia to continue to expand, I find it important for them to listen to the suggestions for newcomers. A big reason to listen to not only my advice, but the advice of many other newcomers is the idea of recruitment. If those new users like what Wikipedia has to offer, they are more likely to recruit other people to join which in turn, expands Wikipedia’s user base. On the other hand, I find that my advice can help in the protection of communities from harmful behavior be newcomers, such as myself. By being weary about who sign-ups and what their approved profession is, then that can protect the Wikipedia community from a surge of inaccurately and poorly informed articles and revisions. Another reason that my advice can be helpful for the Wikipedia community is the idea of increased retention. In the lecture slide, retention can be increased by routines that users must follow in order to join or things that users my “prove”. Those users who have invested more of themselves into the Wikipedia community are more likely to feel more committed and stay longer. These are simply a few reasons as to why my suggestions may have a great impact on the Wikipedia community.

I found that the support for newcomers was highly supportive, regarding the different lessons and even having a welcome page that helped me get started. I found that by Wikipedia creating tools and designating people to help welcome newcomers, assisted in the retaining these users for a longer period of time. On the other hand, I found that although there were tools, people like myself who can get overwhelmed easily, are unable to fully retain the information that Wikipedia gives as help. I think a more user-friendly community will benefit a lot of newcomers that want to contribute on Wikipedia.