User:Zhifanfu/reflection

Reflection
Wikipedia, known as the largest free encyclopedia in the world, functions as a great guide for people to obtain information and explore the world with a simple click. As a student wiki editor, I have learned the powerful features as well as their related ethical principles. As a newcomer, I have interacted with several old-timers and got feedback from them. However, students are less likely to stay in the community when the course ends. In this reflection, I will be explore the potential ways Wikipedia could adopt to ensure student Wiki editors continue contributing to the Wiki community based on my own experience.

The page that I have been working on is He Jiankui Affair. I choose this topic because I am also taking a biology class about CRISPR technology. The case of Dr. He Jiankui is one of the modules in the semester and I'm interested in how he violated ethical principles and the potential consequences. My first impression of this page is that it needs a comprehensive description on how Dr. He violated the ethical principles in the biomedical field. Before I settle on this topic, I was afraid that this page might not have other wiki editors to interact with me since the incident with Dr. He had been a while ago. However, I think it is a Wiki editor's responsibility to help articles become more comprehensive and provide the right information to the audience. Luckily, other editors were also working on this page and trying to re-organize the ethical section after my first draft, which is very encouraging.

I am very grateful that I received help from different Wikipedia communities and was able to have interactions with those experienced Wikipedia editors. I reached out to other Wiki editors on Wikipedia Teahouse who are pretty welcoming. I started a new topic called "Draft on He Jiankui Affair" and introduced myself as a student Wiki editor and was open for some feedback. Two users replied under my thread and provided their feedback within an hour. I was surprised by how quickly they responded and felt more encouraged to edit in my future work. My interactions with the other old-timers are pretty successful and their reactions can be counted as a form of WikiLove. Reagle (2010) wrote about how Wiki Love can be expressed through neutral comments and empathy from old-timers to newcomers. User Going Batty welcomed me under my Wikipedia Teahouse topic and suggested that I use scholarly sources instead of "writing in Wikipedia's voice". After providing this feedback, she also wished me "happy editing". This shows that she is giving suggestions from a neutral standpoint and put her/himself in the position as a newcomer. I wanted to show my appreciation and let her know her suggestions were helpful, so I replied to her comments expressed that I have struggled a lot with the tone, and thanked her publicly on Wikipedia.

The tone usage is the part I struggled the most because writing in Wikipedia's voice requires continuous practice. I tried to use a Wiki tone throughout the whole section, but that feels too informative, and some arguments from the scholars are opinion-oriented. I decided to take a look at Roe v. Wade and see how the editors describe the unethical part of this case and make changes to my section accordingly. I think Wikipedia could add a feature that introduces how long a user has been active on Wikipedia and allow others to see their contribution at a glance. In this way, new-comers could see how far they have gone on this platform and continue to contribute toward their goal.

Peer review is another way that I found useful. One of my classmates provided a comprehensive peer review on my article and listed some great advice of the structure of my paragraph. I made changes on my article based on her suggestions. Zhu et al. have explored the effects of peer feedback and found "negative feedback caused newcomers to work harder on the target article". Although I don't see peer feedback as negative, they still motivated me to improve. I realized that to make Wikipedia an interconnected community, the page should not be an orphan or dead-end. This means hyperlinks are required when the keywords are explained in other Wikipedia articles. After the first Wikipedia draft, I added more links to the article. I obtained the knowledge of orphan articles and dead end articles from the lectures during class; however, I think Wikipedia does not provide this kind of information to the student new-comers. When students create orphan articles or dead-end articles, they are less likely to have interactions with other Wikipedia editors, and they might feel like an "outsider" in the community and will be less likely to continue editing the articles.

Since I'm enrolled in my class course page on Wikipedia Dashboard, I have had the opportunity to peer-reviewed two articles edited by two of my classmates. I have "control over my experience" within this small community. Hwang and Foote (2021) have discussed that small online communities allow people to organize and navigate content easier. The two articles that I peer-reviewed on are Fan Activism and L.A. Burdick edited by my fellow classmates. By providing peer-reviewed feedback for Fan Activism and feedback for L.A. Burdick, I noticed some of the suggestions I gave on those pages could also be applied to my own page. If Wikipedia could start a new feature and allow student new-comers to have the opportunity provide feedback to other new-comers, then the community among new-comers would be more inter-connected. Wiki Dashboard can also be used by all student new-comers: they can start navigating the small community first, and then shifting to the larger Wikipedia community.

According to Kraut's Design Claim 19, "encouraging newcomers to reveal themselves publicly in profiles or introduction threads gives existing group members a basis for conversation and reciprocation with them and increases interaction between old-timers and newcomers". When I first started to use my Wikipedia Homepage, there is a section called "Choose some topics you are interested in editing", and some categories under it includes Culture, History, Science, Regions etc. By allowing me to select something I'm passionate about, I will have more motivation to edit as a newcomer. By selecting these tags, I'm exposed to those old-timers who share similar interest, and they might reach out to me and became my mentor. I think this is an effective way to maximize the sense of participation, be able to be a part of the community quicker and more smoothly, and learn about the community guidelines. When you consider yourself part of a group, you will likely stay with the group even after the course is finished. I learned from one of my classmate's experiences that she has been assigned a mentor because she actively selected those tags. She has had some interactions with her mentor, which is an old-timer and she received many great feedback.

In conclusion, I'm glad to have had this opportunity to explore the world of Wikipedia and to contribute to the community as a student new-comer. I think there are certainly ways that Wikipedia could increase user stickiness and encourage student wiki editors to continue contributing. Wikipedia could have a page and let student new-comers provided peer-reviewed feedback to other student new-comers and be able to exchange ideas. New-comers tend to share similar questions and problems, so when they have the opportunities to build connections with one another, their knowledge base will become more comprehensive.

References