Talk:Campaigns/WikiProjects

Join one of the conversations below, or add a new section with an observation important to you.

Have you ever had trouble finding collaborators for an on-wiki project?

FR : Avez-vous déjà eu des difficultés à trouver des collaborateurs pour un projet on-wiki ? AR : هل سبق لك أن واجهت صعوبة في العثور على متعاونين لمشروع على الويكي؟ ?

• En : Have you ever gone looking for a collaborative activity on the wikis, but can't find it? Describe your experience.
• FR : Vous est-il déjà arrivé de chercher une activité collaborative sur les wikis, mais de ne pas la trouver ? Décrivez votre

expérience.

• AR : هل سبق لك أن بحثت عن نشاط تعاوني على مواقع الويكي ولم تتمكن من العثور عليه؟ صف تجربتك.
• Astinson (WMF) (talk) 19:20, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, always. Off the top of my head, I think these would be helpful:

• As a non-technical coordinator trying to recruit new editors to an event, I want an easy way to get a CentralNotice banner running.
  • It's not enough to follow the request process or have community support for the banner; it requires someone with coding skills and user rights to do the work. We need people who can make the banners actually happen.
• As a coordinator trying to identify existing interested editors, I want to put in a category (either Talk: or mainspace) and get a list of editors who have edited those pages.
  • Use case: I know that a class will be editing articles about _____ next week, and I want to ask the existing contributors to help.
  • Use case: I want to start a new group ("WikiProject Subject"), and I want to invite these editors to join the group.
  • Use case: I need help or feedback related this area, and I want to contact relevant editors impartially.
  • Bonus points if I can filter the list of editors for accounts with certain qualifications (e.g., "Editors with 10–500 edits who edited these pages during the last month") or certain kinds of edits (e.g., "Editors who have added new content, instead of just fiddling with the formatting").
  • Bonus points if I can do this automagically (e.g., "If you make 50 substantive contributions to articles in w:en:Category:WikiProject Medicine articles, and you haven't been blocked yet, then you get a notification about the group's existence").
• As an editor at a large wiki who needs subject-specific help, I want to be directed to a relevant help forum.
  • Use case: I have a subject-specific question, so I want to ask someone who knows something about this subject area. I feel I am unlikely to find such a person at a general/whole-community page. (Five out of six experienced enwiki editors [=500+ edits] have never posted to any village pump.[1])

WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:43, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi @WhatamIdoing -- I think you might be in luck, we recently created an invitation tool that super powers this kind of communication, using an algorithm that predicts if they are making sufficient edits in the area, you can test it: Campaigns/Foundation_Product_Team/Invitation_list -- FYI @IFried (WMF): & @Udehb-WMF: Astinson (WMF) (talk) 23:12, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

What kinds of collaboration do you want on the wikis but don't have?

FR : Quels sont les types de collaboration que vous souhaitez sur les wikis mais qui n'existent pas ? AR: ما هي أنواع التعاون التي ترغب في رؤيتها على مواقع الويكي ولكنها غير موجودة؟

• EN : What kind of structure do you think would help you collaborate more with others on the wikis?
• FR : Quel type de structure vous aiderait à collaborer davantage avec les autres sur les wikis ?
• AR : ما نوع الهيكل الذي تعتقد أنه سيساعدك على التعاون بشكل أكبر مع الآخرين على مواقع الويكي؟

Astinson (WMF) (talk) 18:58, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Do you have any observations about why collaboration is not working for you or your community?

FR : Avez-vous des observations sur les raisons pour lesquelles la collaboration ne fonctionne pas pour vous ou votre communauté ? AR : هل لديك أي ملاحظات حول سبب عدم نجاح التعاون معك أو مع مجتمعك؟

• EN : Have you ever tried to collaborate with other contributors and it has worked? Or have you observed others in your community trying to collaborate and failing? Explain the situations and why you think the collaboration didn't work.
• FR : Avez-vous déjà essayé de collaborer avec d'autres contributeurs et cela a fonctionné ? Ou avez-vous observé d'autres membres de votre communauté essayer de collaborer et échouer ? Expliquez les situations et les raisons pour lesquelles vous pensez que la collaboration n'a pas fonctionné.
• AR : هل سبق لك أن حاولت التعاون مع مساهمين آخرين ونجح الأمر؟ أو هل لاحظت أن آخرين في مجتمعك حاولوا التعاون وفشلوا؟ اشرح المواقف ولماذا تعتقد أن التعاون لم ينجح.

Astinson (WMF) (talk) 19:20, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Thoughts:

• If you're not recruiting, you're shrinking. Recruiting from among existing editors has to be undertaken deliberately.
  • This is the hiring manager's dilemma: I am too busy to spend time hiring and training someone, but if I don't hire and train someone, I will always be too busy.
  • Also, the people who will benefit most from this work are not always skilled at doing it. They probably don't even know that it needs to be done.
• The English Wikipedia tends to fragment into ever-smaller groups. "WikiProject Plants" is sustainable at enwiki's scale. "WikiProject Flowers" is small. "WikiProject Tulips" is doomed. A system that encourages fewer, larger groups is better than one that encourages niches.
  • The smaller the groups are, the more likely that there will be filter-bubble effects, with each group developing ideas that conflict with other groups. For example, WikiProject Chemicals and WikiProject Pharmacology have different ideas about what belongs in infoboxes, which has been awkward when the subject of an article has both chemical/industrial uses and also medical/drug uses. Neither group is wrong (and these two groups figured out how to resolve the conflict), but you're less likely to have this problem in one big group than with dozens of little groups that aren't talking to each other.
• Hot-button subjects tend to either be 'captured' by one viewpoint, or to be an energy-draining slog through endless disputes. The first group develops solidarity around the idea of keeping the Wrong™ POV out of the article ("Ineffective homeopathy is a pseudoscientific idea that doesn't work"). The second group never has any clear successes, so they never feel rewarded for working together. Neither of these are good outcomes.

WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:59, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

@WhatamIdoing These are great observations, and track with some of the risks I have observed as well, will definitely keep an eye on them as we begin planning -- I am particularly interested in the scope and size problem -- would it be better if the projects didn't have to be big permenant infrastructure but assumed a kindof temporariness: that they may evolve and then disappear once they reach a natural end? Astinson (WMF) (talk) 23:14, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

The world will need WikiProject Medicine as long as Wikipedia exists. However, it's entirely possible that some groups, e.g., WikiProject COVID-19 will reach a natural end. The COVID-19 group may some day be folded up into the bigger, permanent group of editors who care about medical content.

The English Wikivoyage tends towards temporary groups; see voy:en:Category:Wikivoyage Expeditions. Some of these may be temporary for years, but the overall idea is that we have a goal (either time-bound or fixing all of some problem), and when we're done, we're done. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:38, 23 August 2024 (UTC)