User talk:Theonesean/sandbox/AfC Mentoring

Discussion and Development
How are people going to be "matched" to their mentor? Unless we are going to require some kind of background for students and mentors, I see it as less of a "matching" process and more of a "a mentor will be selected for you" or "a mentor will adopt you" based on their free time? Not sure what might be right, but "matched" doesn't seem to fit. Just a thought! Keep up the good work! Technical 13 (talk) 16:09, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Agreed. What I was going to do was build a basic bot to select a mentor for each student, check up on the mentors if they haven't listed themselves as available or participated in a course, create copies of the course for each student, etc. I believe it's in a comment on the Table of Contents. TheOneSean [ U &#124; T &#124; C ] 18:21, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, a mentor matching bot... Interesting idea, what would the criteria be? Common user categories, timezones, languages, hrmm... not sure what else might be appropriate... Technical 13 (talk) 18:44, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I was thinking common timezones and languages, yeah, and maybe common locations, to encourage local Wikiproject contribution and possibly IRL meetups. TheOneSean [ U &#124; T &#124; C ] 21:59, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
 * mw:API:Users doesn't seem to have a lot to offer on user information... You could get categories off their user page/talk page... Not sure where to get the rest of the information unless they offer it... Is there more User information available using labs? Technical 13 (talk) 22:10, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
 * New to this discussion but seriously  concerned with  finding  solutions to  improve AfC (with  some recent meetings with  senior Foundation  executives), but not  new at  all  to  the issues surrounding  mentors and schools for reviewers, rollbackers, NPPers, etc -  because I  created some of them. As I  said here: The reason I closed down the old CVUA and created a new one was because it was a question of the blind leading the blind, and the whole thing had become a MMPORG for younger and/or inexperienced users.  In  developing  projects such  as these there is a danger in  introducing  too  much  bureaucracy  and automation. Finding  suitable levels of experience is not  too difficult and that  why  I  closed down   the old CVUA (with  strong  consensus from  other admins) and created the new one with  an entirely  new look, and with a much  simpler  system for users finding and/or being  referred to trainers. If  the trainers all  have a required level  of competency, then 'matching' hardly  comes into  the equation, especially  if the mentors have posted the details of their availability  on  the mentor list. Someone you  might  want  to  ping  on  this is  but  I don't  know how he is fixed for time right  now. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:24, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've pinged Theopolisme already because I think  his input based on  his experience with  the old CVUA could be very  valuable. I'v also  now had a thorough  look  at  Theonesean's entire project. I  like the start  he has made  on  the syllabus which  I  think  is the most  important  part and I  would like to  see more, although individual  mentors will  probably  take this as a guideline and adapt  it  to  their own system of didactics. I  do  think however, that  to  avoid TL;DR and instruction  creep,  that  a much  simpler home page would be better on  the lines of the WP:CVUA and its other sub pages which  would then also harmonise with  the other mentoring  project  pages across the Wiki.  Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:51, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * While I'm rather busy at the moment with AFCH and some other silly real life matters, I took a few minutes to look through the proposed framework. Initial thoughts: I agree with in that WP:CREEP comes to mind when looking at some of the pages. When working with the CVUA over a year ago, several things really stuck with me, one of which was, again as Kudpung says, giving mentors freedom is very important. Online learning comes to mind as an interesting parallel: I have taken several online courses in the past, and in each of them there was a very specific syllabus, a very specific textbook, a very specific quiz for each section, etc., etc... specific, specific, specific. While this is not a bad thing in and of itself, too many specifics can be quite limiting, because they do not encourage the instructor to tailor lessons specifically to the student. Take a look at this interesting forum post (it's amazing what a bit of googling pulls up) if you get a chance&mdash;it very neatly compares "instruction vs. teaching." Mentorship is, in the sense of that post, all about teaching, which is all about evaluation of the individual students. tl;dr less is more when it comes to guidelines, even if it seems counterintuitive at first.  Theopolisme  ( talk )  03:21, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, the both of you, this is some wonderful advice. I'll obviously be asking you for help a lot, as this has given me lots to work with. I'm going to be really busy tomorrow, but I might have a few hours to myself. Thanks, the  one  sean  05:39, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Due to some additional ideas that have been suggested, and because I  had some in-depth  talks with  the Foundation, I  have pinged Steven walling  and Brandon Harris for a yes/no response on  one of those suggestions. If they  respond positively, it  will  relieve the community  of the technical development  aspect,  while I'm  confident  that  the volunteers' ideas will  be taken very  much  into  consideration  and integrated if necessary/possible. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:54, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

I've started developing (just barely) an extension to do everything that needs to be done. I'll put it up on GitHub this week and give you all a link to it and add anyone interested in contributing to the project. :) Technical 13 (talk) 13:47, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Ping me too. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 06:11, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

AfC school project
What I've done is to  clone one of our existing  school/academy  projects to  keep  the AfC school  in  harmony  with  the suite of training/mentorship projects. It's based on the NPP school  I  made, which  in  turn was based on  the revamp  of the CVUA I  made, and on Worm's adoption  project. I've substituted new text and links where applicable, and left some stuff  in  for trainers, students etc, that  may  be useful  or that  can be modified with  your  own  syllabus. The pages for lists of students and trainers exist already. For simplicity, these school projects are a one-page system  with  no  transcluded elements.

For you to  do:
 * check through the source - there are plenty  of useful  hidden notes in  it
 * design or find a free logo for the AfC Academy to  replace the policeman used as a placeholder
 * make an AfC reviewer infobox userbox
 * do a thorough  copyedit (I may  have made some typos), and decide on  ENGVAR.
 * change the CSS to another colour scheme.
 * add a 'Further reading' list for any  useful  pages of guidelines, essays, etc.
 * create the prepared shortcut redirect page
 * anything else you  can think  of, but  KISS it -  less is more - remember that  all  too  often the potential trainers themselves are inexperienced and/or over-enthusiastic and that  was the downfall  of the old CVUA system. No  bots, no mini icons, very  low intervention, things that    will  remember well; it  must  not  turn into  a social  gathering like the old CVUA did, time is better spent on  actual reviewing  or adding content.

A couple of hints for trainers and their students: Remember that the English Wikipedia is accessed by  every  kind of person  on  the planet. 'Cool talk' or 'teen-talk' à la 'hey  bro' or other vernacular is inappropriate on  an encyclopedia project  unless you  are very familiar with  your regular collaborators. We're dealing here with  everything  from  rappers making  their autobios to  grouchy  old retired uni profs like me, industry bosses, politicians and other prominent  people, and non-native speakers. Anyone who has worked on  OTRS will know this only  too  well. Above all, emphasis in  the training  programme should be on  detecting  subtle promotion, spam, and copyvio (as my  great  mentor  constantly repeats -  yes even I  have to  ask  for advice very often), attack pages and not so  evident hoaxes.

Lastly, this training programme is not  dependent  on  any  new developments concerning reviewer permissions etc, or the new 'draft'  namespace that  may  be created for submissions in  the near future, but  some parts of the school  may  need to  be occasionally  updated. Whatever happens, the principles remain the same.

It's here. Move it, copy and paste the entire content, or whatever, (or don't use it at  all!) I  don't  mind if my edits are not  on  the final project because I'll  be deleting my user draft  when it's done with.

Happy editing, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:59, 19 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Update: There is now a talk page attached to  that  draft. Use it  by  all  means. If  the school  as its stands is adopted, the talk  page and its edit notice can be moved with it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:26, 19 October 2013 (UTC)