User:Seeley32/Report

After my personal experience dealing with Wikipedia this quarter, I have a few suggestions for the foundation and the community. To begin, as a first time Wikipedia user, there were a few times that I was confused on how to navigate the site. I found the instructional manuals to be somewhat helpful, but they weren’t always able to answer all the questions that I had. I really enjoyed how some of the other online communities we have looked at this quarter had a lot more interaction between users. I felt a bit nervous sometimes to make contributions to the site, so I think Wikipedia could benefit by including more ways for user to user interaction. I think that the site could largely benefit from a question and answer section, where users could discuss logistics of the site. I also think that requiring maybe one or two other Wikipedian’s to review edits before making a page live would encourage more interaction between users and increase the sites credibility with more peer review.

On Wikipedia, I was able to update a stub page. I started drafting the new page in my sandbox, learning how to cite sources, get appropriate references, and follow Wikipedia guidelines. I was also able to peer review some of my classmates’ sandbox articles and interact with some of my peers over their talk pages. I learned many things, including the basics of the Wikipedia site and its community. I learned their guidelines and how to edit a page with as most accuracy as possible. I learned how to interact with other users through talk pages, and how to move my article from my sandbox to the live site.

A few of the concepts we have discussed in this course that related to my experience with Wikipedia included community guidelines, the sites design, as well as motivation. To begin, Wikipedia was very clear through their training modules what they expected from their community members. Like other online communities we dealt with this quarter, Wikipedia has a clear code of conduct to ensure users can know what to expect and how to use the cite. There are strict copyright policies in place to ensure that all work added to the site is original or appropriately cited. It is expected that users are being active in the talk pages and interacting with other users, being respectful and kind with all feedback, comments, and edits. Having an appropriate code of conduct is very important to an online community in order to set standards and set the norm and tone for the site and its members. Another concept we dealt with this quarter that I noticed when contributing to Wikipedia was the aspects of different levels and stages to the cite. I was able to work on my draft in my sandbox, before making the article live. I found this to be similar to the other sites we dealt with, with varying stages of editing and contributing to the site. While anyone can be an editor of Wikipedia, I found it slightly comforting that I was still able to edit in the safety of my sandbox before making my article live. However, I think that I was a bit nervous to move my article to live because I was lacking any motivation. I knew that I was not going to gain anything from posting my article, and there was no real status that I was going to reach with my contribution to the site. With so many users constantly editing and updating, I think it would be difficult for Wikipedia to create any sense of ranking system for users. Motivation is a powerful tool I think for sites that are more up and coming, but with Wikipedia being the powerhouse that it is, I think people are self-motivated to contribute. While I myself was a bit nervous at first, I did feel very accomplished and excited when my article finally went live.

My recommendations should be taken more seriously than just random advice from one user because over the course of this quarter, I have been exposed to a plethora of different online communities. I have seen aspects to a site that work well, and different parts that maybe weren’t as affective. I think that the more exposure people get to different site, the more aware they become to the pros and cons to different systems. I do not think that it is possible to create a site that is 100% effective in all of its goals, but I think that taking the advice of users into account is very important to making the site as successful as possible.

Something I noticed with many of the other online communities that we dealt with was the presence of elite members. Whether it was someone who was academically qualified, or someone who was prone to write honest and solid reviews, there was a ranking system for the people who were contributing to the site. However, with Wikipedia, anyone can make edits. I was able to make changes to a page with just as much ease as someone who was far more or less qualified than me. I think this has both pros and cons. I enjoyed that I was able to make edits, however it also made me a bit nervous to make my page live. I think the fact that anyone can edit or create a page also means that the possibilities are endless, and people are able to write about subjects and topics that they are interested in. The site is constantly changing and evolving, which makes for a very active and successful community.