User:Savannaellis/Report

In my experience of writing my Wikipedia article on ‘Hannah Pennington,’ I felt the structure and resources provided in the Wiki Edu training were instrumental in guiding me through the requirements and expectations for content posted on Wikipedia. It was clear in outlining what types of sources to utilize, how to find a topic to write about, how to avoid plagiarism and how to review others’ articles. I was able to search for missing articles on the WikiProject Women to find one that peaked my interest and that I felt there was enough information on the internet to construct a substantive article about. I was able to effectively gather information from different sources, contrast it between these sources for accuracy, and reiterate it in a clear and concise way to create a detailed article about Hannah Pennington. I also checked out other Wikipedia articles for Paralympians – in particular Paralympic skiers – to see what important information should be included and how it should be laid out. While I did struggle at times to find enough information from enough varied types of sources, I do believe I put together an article that provided enough detail on the topic per Wikipedia’s standards. It was helpful to get input from other classmates’ as well as other Wikipedians for what they thought I could add/change about my article. It was also helpful for me to get the opportunity to edit other people’s articles and double check the standards for Wikipedia articles so that I can contribute to the greater Wikipedia community in assisting with any article revisions in the future.

Overall, I believe the Wikimedia Foundation has succeeded in the Wiki Edu training program for new Wikipedians. As for an improvement in this particular area, I would recommend that the training be made to be more interactive so people have the chance to edit articles or write content in a simulation, where it can be reviewed and corrected before they take to creating/editing live articles. Also, I feel like there should be more awareness made about the existence of this training as well as the ability to actually edit and contribute to Wikipedia as a member of the general public, as it was not something I understood entirely before beginning this class. I feel like if there was more information on general Wikipedia articles or banners on their website, that spoke of this ability to learn how to effectively contribute – there would be an increase in contributions by committed and new Wikipedians. Another piece of advice I’d give for the Wikipedia community is that before they well-versed users delete articles or make significant alterations to content that new Wikipedians have created, that they message or notify them in a more constructive manner that allows them to learn from their mistakes. I understand that there needs to be some type of system in place to curb spanners and trolls, but not all unsuitable content for Wikipedia is uploaded in malicious intent. In addition, I feel that there could be an easier way to share the compiled list of articles that were missing and needed to be written as I feel as though that is the main thing that would deter me from contributing to Wikipedia beyond the parameters of this class.

In accordance with what I have advised above to Wikimedia and the Wikipedia community, we spoke about monitoring and moderating content (DC2) particular with reactive peer reporting. While, this is already occurring on Wikipedia, I think new standards could be put in place to be more courteous to newcomers who are trying their best to meet Wikipedia’s standards while still filtering the obvious spammers and trolls. Formal reputation systems would also be useful in giving public feedback to acknowledge users’ improvements and strengths in article-writing so people know how and what to critique in individuals’ articles. We also discussed the importance of norms, and although there are five that do exist for Wikipedia, I believe that before any member is able to contribute they are forced to go through a brief training on how to abide by these. In terms of the suggestion I made for experienced Wikipedians to be more constructive in helping new Wikipedians particularly with the approach to how they delete/edit their work – this could play into the new members’ normative commitment to Wikipedia and their future in editing and adding articles. This could be in terms of both direct and generalized reciprocity in how they could help those that helped them with their articles, and also go on to help other new members as they get a grasp on how to stay in accordance with Wikipedia’s norms and expectations. This could potentially be aided by making the talk pages more user-friendly and foster a discussion that’s easier to keep track off and attribute to specific edits different users have made. I believe that this is an important piece of advice that should be taken into consideration, because interactions and relationship-building in online communities are the primary aspects that keep people participating.

Reflecting on what I have done on Wikipedia so far in accordance to what we have been taught in class, I feel like in terms of content that would be important to add into the curriculum would be how to become a leader in online communities and find a particular niche for what you want in an online community. I feel like there a lot of communities online that I am not aware of that I could contribute positively too but it’s hard to find those that are not the obvious ones such as Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, etc. I also don’t know how to make my mark on the communities I am apart of too so if there was a particular process of how to seek these opportunities.