User talk:75.108.94.227/exit poll possible questions

usertalk message, rough draft
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.108.94.227 (talk) 12:37, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Dear Wikipedian, you recently voted in the ArbCom election. Your username, along with around 140 other usernames of your fellow wikipedians, was randomly selected from the 2000+ Wikipedians who voted this year, with the help of one of the election-commissioners. If you are willing, could you please participate (at your option either on-wiki via userspace or off-wiki via email) in an exit poll, and answer some questions about how you decided amongst the ArbCom candidates?

If you decide to participate in this exit poll, the statistical results will be published in the Signpost, an online newspaper with over 1000 wikipedians among the readership. There are about twelve questions, which have alphanumerical answers; it should take you a few minutes to complete the exit poll questionnaire, and will help improve Wikipedia by giving future candidates information about what you think is important. This is only an unofficial survey, and will have no impact on your actual vote during this election, nor in any future election.

All questions are individually optional, and this entire exit poll itself is also entirely optional, though if you choose not to participate, I would appreciate a brief reply indicating why you decided not to take part (see Question Zero). Thanks for being a Wikipedian, ~

questionnaire, very rough draft
Dear Wikipedian, please fill out these questions -- at your option via usertalk, via userspace subpage, or via email, see Detailed Instructions at the end of the twelve questions -- by putting the appropriate answer in the blanks provided. If you decide to not answer a question (all questions are optional), please put the reason down: "undecided" / "private information" / "prefer not to answer" / "question is not well-posed" / "other: please specify". Although the Signpost cannot guarantee that complex answers can be processed for publication, it will help us improve future exit polls, if you give us comments about why you could not answer specific questions.
 * Q#0. Will you be responding to the questions in this exit poll? Why or why not?
 * Your Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#1. Arbs must have at least 0k / 2k / 4k / 8k / 16k / 32k+ edits to Wikipedia.
 * Your Numeric Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#2. Arbs must have at least 0 / 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7+ years editing Wikipedia.
 * Your Numeric Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#3. Arbs...
 * A: should not be an admin
 * B: should preferably not be an admin
 * C: can be but need not be an admin
 * D: should preferably be an admin
 * E: must be or have been an admin
 * F: must currently be an admin
 * Your Single-Letter Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#4. Arbs must have at least 0 / 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7+ years of experience as an admin.
 * Your Numeric Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#5. Completely optional, as all these questions are complete optional:  which candidates did you support this year, and why?
 * Your List-Of-Usernames You Supported:
 * Your Comments:


 * The Quick&Easy End. Thank you for your answers.  Please sign with your wikipedia username here, especially important if you are emailing your answers, so we can avoid double-counting and similar confusion.
 * Your Wikipedia Username:
 * General Comments:


 * Q#6. Completely optional, as all these questions are complete optional:  which candidates did you oppose this year, and why?
 * Your List-Of-Usernames You Opposed:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#7. Are there any Wikipedians you would like to see run for ArbCom, in the December 2016 election, twelve months from now?  Who?
 * Your List-Of-Usernames As Potential Future Candidates:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#8. Why did you vote in the 2015 ArbCom elections?  In particular, how did you learn about the election, and what motivated you to participate this year?
 * Your Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#9. For potential arbs, good indicators of the right kind of contributions outside noticeboard activity, would be:
 * A: discussions on the talkpages of articles which ARE subject to arbcom sanctions
 * B: discussions on the talkpages of articles NOT subject to arbcom restrictions
 * C: sending talkpage notifications e.g. with Twinkle, sticking to formal language
 * D: sending talkpage notifications manually, and explaining with informal English
 * E: working on policies/guidelines
 * F: working on essays/helpdocs
 * G: working on GA/FA/DYK/similar content
 * H: working on copyedits/infoboxes/pictures/similar content
 * I: working on categorization e.g. with HotCat
 * J: working on autofixes e.g. with AWB or REFILL
 * K: working with other Wikipedians via wikiprojects e.g. with MILHIST
 * L: working with other Wikipedians via IRC e.g. with or informally
 * M: working with other Wikipedians via email e.g. with UTRS or informally
 * N: working with other Wikipedians in person e.g. at edit-a-thons / Wikipedian-in-residence / Wikimania / etc
 * O: other types of contribution, please specify in your comments
 * Please specify a comma-separated list of the types of contributions you see as positive indicators for arb-candidates to have, in order from most-positive-work to least-positive-but-still-valuable-work.
 * Your Ordered-List-Of-Letters Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#10. Arbs who make many well-informed comments at these noticeboards (please specify which!) have the right kind of background, or experience, for ArbCom.
 * Options: A: AE, B: arbCases, C: LTA, D: OTRS, E: AN,
 * continued : F: OS/REVDEL, G: CU/SPI, H: AN/I, I: pageprot, J: NAC,
 * continued : K: RfC, L: RM, M: DRN, N: EA, O: 3o,
 * continued : P: NPOVN, Q: BLPN, R: RSN, S: NORN, T: FTN,
 * continued : U: teahouse, V: helpdesk, W: AfC, X: NPP, Y: AfD,
 * continued : 1: UAA, 2: COIN, 3: antiSpam, 4: AIV, 5: 3RR,
 * continued : 6: CCI, 7: NFCC, 8: abusefilter, 9: BAG, 0: VPT,
 * continued : Z: Other_noticeboard_not_listed_here_please_wikilink_your_answer
 * Please specify a comma-separated list of the noticeboards you see as important background-experience for arb-candidates to have, in order from most-important-noticeboard to least-important-but-still-valuable-noticeboard.
 * Your Ordered-List-Of-Letters Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#11. Arbs who make many comments at these noticeboards (please specify!) have the wrong kind of temperment, or personality, for ArbCom.
 * Options: (same as previous question -- please see above)
 * Please specify a comma-separated list of the noticeboards you see as worrisome personality-indicators for arb-candidates to have, in order from most-worrisome-noticeboard to least-worrisome-but-still-a-red-flag-noticeboard.
 * Your Ordered-List-Of-Letters Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#12. Anything else we ought to know?
 * Your Custom-Designed Question(s):
 * Your Custom-Designed Answer(s):


 * The Extended-Answers End. Thank you for your answers.  Please sign with your wikipedia username here, especially important if you are emailing your answers, so we can avoid double-counting and similar confusion.
 * Your Wikipedia Username:
 * General Comments:

Detailed Instructions: you are welcome to answer these questions via usertalk (easiest), via userspace subpage (to preserve your answers for future wikilinking), or via email (for a modicum of privacy). Processing of responses will be performed in batches of ten, prior to publication in the Signpost. GamerPro64 will be processing the email-based answers, and will strive to maintain the privacy of your answers (as well as your email address and the associated IP address typically found in the email-headers), though of course as a volunteer effort, we cannot legally guarantee that GamerPro64 will have a system free from computer virii, we cannot legally guarantee that GamerPro64 will resist hypothetical bribes offered by the KGB/NSA/MI6 to reveal your secrets, and we cannot legally guarantee that GamerPro64 will make no mistakes. If you choose to answer on-wiki, your answers will be visible to other Wikipedians. If you choose to answer via email, your answers will be sent unencrypted over the internet, and we will do our best to protect your privacy, but unencrypted email is inherently not a proper mechanism for doing so. Sorry. We do promise to try hard, not to make any mistakes, in the processing and presentation of your answers. If you have any questions or concerns, you may contact column-editor User:GamerPro64, copy-editor User:75.108.94.227, or copy-editor User:Ryk72 via their talkpages. Thanks for reading, and thanks for helping Wikipedia.
 * If you wish to answer via usertalk, go ahead and fill in the blanks by editing this subsection. Once you have completed the usertalk-based exit poll answers,, leave a short usertalk note, and click save.  The point of leaving the usertalk note, is to make sure your answers are processed and published.
 * If you wish to answer via a userspace subpage, you may create it (for instance via Special:MyTalk/ACE2015_exit_poll), and then paste the *wikitext* of the questions therein. Once you have completed the subpage-based exit poll answers,, leave a short usertalk note with a working wikilink to the subpage you just created, and click save. The point of leaving the usertalk note, is to make sure your answers are processed and published (not missed because they were not on usertalk).
 * If you wish to answer via email, create a new email to the Signpost column-editor by clicking Special:EmailUser/GamerPro64, and then paste the *plaintext* of the questions therein. Once you have completed the email-based exit poll answers,, leave a short usertalk note specifying the *time* you sent the email, and click save.  The point of leaving the usertalk note, is to make sure your answers are processed and published (not stuck in the spam-folder).

discussion
That is ten twelve questions, although not numbered sequentially, but ordered purposefully since some of the questions are related. Should some questions be cut? Should other questions be added? How to best format the long set of choices? Suggestions and improvements welcome. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 17:22, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Reworked into closer-to-viable form. Ping User:Ryk72 and User:GamerPro64, also ping User:Drmies who made some fixes, are there any complaints before we start sending out the blurbs to the 137ish people?  75.108.94.227 (talk) 08:45, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Have bolded & italicised the "optional" in Q9 & Q10. Have a small concern that there is a lot of work in answering Q5-7, which may result in fewer than desired responses to the survey as a whole; thoughts on simplifying by not requiring ordering of the answers? - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 08:58, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, or cutting out some of the question-options. WP:BEBOLD and make some changes, please, to get it closer to what you think will best Improve The 'Pedia.  :-)       The ordering is supposed to be optional, just like giving any answers whatsoever is supposed to be optional.  We may have a pure tl;dr response, to a dozen questions, so I've also considered splitting the exit-poll into a short-form and an extended-form.  How about we put these questions into the short-easy-fast-exit-poll box:
 * Q#0. Will you be responding to the questions in this exit poll? Why or why not? Your Answer:
 * Q#1. Arbs must have at least 0k / 2k / 4k / 8k / 16k / 32k+ edits to Wikipedia. Your Numeric Answer:
 * Q#2. Arbs must have at least 0 / 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7+ years editing Wikipedia. Your Numeric Answer:
 * Q#3. Arbs should WP:2B!2B an admin (six options). Your Single-Letter Answer:
 * Q#4. Arbs must have at least 0 / 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7+ years of experience as an admin. Your Numeric Answer:
 * Q#9. new_q#5 Your List-Of-Usernames You Supported:
 * The Quick End. Your Wikipedia Username:
 * We can put these 'hard' questions into the extended-exit-poll box:
 * Q#10. new_q#6 Your List-Of-Usernames You Opposed (and why):
 * Q#11. new_q#7 Your List-Of-Usernames As Potential Future Candidates:
 * Q#8. new_q#8 Why did you vote? how did you learn about the election, what motivated you to participate?
 * Q#7. new_q#9 ...good indicators of the right kind of contributions outside noticeboards... (list of ~15 options)... Your Ordered-List-Of-Letters Answer:
 * Q#5. new_q#10 ...many well-informed comments at these noticeboards... right kind of background, or experience ...(list of ~35 options)... Your Ordered-List-Of-Letters Answer:
 * Q#6. new_q#11 ...at these noticeboards... wrong kind of temperment, or personality, for ArbCom. ...(list of ~35 options)... Your Ordered-List-Of-Letters Answer:
 * The Real End. Your General Comments
 * It will still help if we can narrow down the "extended" questions so that people are more likely to answer them, so feel free to make tweaks or even Big Changes. Best, 75.108.94.227 (talk) 10:13, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, implemented. We can add some tweaks, to make perfectly clear that the ordering-bit is optional, and that taking the extended-form is optional, but I don't want to be so verbose explaining that stuff is optional, people's eyes glaze over.  :-)      Tough balance to strike.  Please make any changes you see fit to make.  Best, 75.108.94.227 (talk) 10:27, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * If I put my statistician hat on for a second, how do we intend to analyze the "ordered" answers? I'm inclined to just ask "which are important?". - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 10:29, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * We cannot truly analyze them. :-)      But asking for the ordering, will give us qualitative information about who the voters "most supported" for instance.  We can do some limited analysis work with that, such as enumerating how many times each candidate was listed as #1 by those polled, but I'm not really planning to do that stuff for the actual Signpost article.  Most likely we'll just count up the support-votes, and list a numeric total for each of the 19 still-active candidates, as our "published" statistics.
 * Similarly, we won't REALLY be able to analyze the "how did you learn about the vote" question... but if 90% of people say, I knew about it before the mass-message, that is worth noting, whereas if 90% of people say, I only responded to the mass-message and have no idea what ArbCom even does, *that* is also worth noting. I considered asking for "top five" rather than "ordered list of indeterminate length" but went for the latter option in the end.  Feel free to make changes, though.
 * p.s. Ryk72, and other interested folks, if you have a few minutes can you verify that my time-estimates (4 minutes && 2 minutes) are not ludicrous, and make sure that GamerPro64 can receive email-submissions via the provided instructions, and that the click-to-ping-usertalk trick I used is working properly? Thanks, 75.108.94.227 (talk) 11:01, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Click-to-ping & GP64's email work. Will check times in a wee while. - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 11:12, 5 December 2015 (UTC)