IRC office hours/Office hours 2011-04-14

00:02 < aude> hi sgardner

00:02 < Austin> Hi, Sue

00:02 < mpantages> hi aude

00:02 < sgardner> Hey Aude! Congratulations! :-)

00:02 < tyw7> hi sgardner :)

00:02 -!- mode/#wikimedia-office [+v sgardner] by ChanServ

00:02 < tyw7> sgardner: for what?

00:02 < aude> see everyone in July 2012 :)

00:02 <+sgardner> Wikimania 2012 :-)

00:02 < Austin> Yes, congratulations to the DC team!

00:02 < aude> and Haifa

00:02 < tyw7> where?

00:02 < RoanKattouw> Whee DC

00:02 < Danny_B|backup> dc got it?

00:02 < Austin> You guys totally earned it. :)

00:02 < jowen> Yes congratulations I look forward to DC and Haifa!

00:03 < tyw7> in Washington DC?

00:03 < jeremyb> tyw7: georgetown university

00:03 < tyw7> not in UK?

00:03 < tyw7> any meetups in Cornwall?

00:03 < Pharos> and Lake Vostok!

00:03 < tyw7> and are we being logged?

00:03 < aude> we plan to do newbie outreach, ensure campus ambassadors

continues, etc.

00:03 < jeremyb> haifa -> DC -> stellenbosh? :)

00:03 < Shakata|Laptop> tyw7: yes

00:03 < Philippe> tyw7: yes, this channel is logged for office hours

00:03 < tyw7> is office hours on?

00:03 < Austin> Haifa -> DC -> floating platform above the Atlantic

00:03 < StevenW> tyw7, yeah IRC office hours is always posted on Meta later

00:04 < tyw7> O_O

00:04 < Nihiltres> tyw7: yes

00:04  * tommorris was already here

00:04 < Pharos> shipping containers, ppl

00:04 < tyw7> :)

00:04 < aude> Austin: you got our email right? (we can chat later, offline)

00:04  * tommorris is *always* here

00:04 < StevenW> Hey tommorris :)

00:04 <+sgardner> Hey is Gerard here? I wanted to congratulate him

too: he had a really nice blog post the other day :-)

00:04 < Fluffernutter> Pharos: you can't fit all of wikimania into the

wikicontainer, hon

00:04 < Theo10011> He is.

00:04 < RoanKattouw> GerardM- is here

00:04 < jeremyb> Pharos++

00:04 < tyw7> Hi everyone!

00:04 < jeremyb> GerardM-?

00:04 < tyw7> Hello world!!

00:04 < Austin> aude: yes, and I'm composing a well-reasoned reply

that I intended to have finished by now, but I promise you'll get it.

)

00:04 < tyw7> :)

00:04 < Theo10011> Hey Austin.

00:04 < aude> Austin: thanks, much appreciated

00:04 < Austin> Hey Theo

00:04 < tyw7> what office hours about?

00:05 < tyw7> is there any particular topic?

00:05 < Theo10011> Yes tyw7.

00:05 < Theo10011> it's on top.

00:05 < tommorris> oh, NPP

00:05 < Nihiltres> tyw7: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours

00:05 < Theo10011> Topic: New Page Patrol and other forms of

interaction with new editors, Resolution:Openness, and related issues

00:06 < tyw7> Ummm... encourage more editors?

00:06 -!- mode/#wikimedia-office [+o StevenW] by ChanServ

00:06  * tommorris should switch to his decent laptop

00:06 < jowen> hello delphine

00:06  * tyw7 is on my desktop...

00:06 < Austin> So, not to be a smartass, but I feel compelled to

point out the irony of holding a talk about increased global

participation when it's 1:00 in the morning here in Europe and even

later in most of the "Global South."

00:06 < Fluffernutter> oh god, this again

00:06 < tyw7> How about making terms easier for editors?

00:06 < delphine> hey jowen!

00:06 < tyw7> :)

00:06 <+sgardner> I think we're talking about NPP today, right?

00:06 < tyw7> Fluffernutter: not what again?

00:06 < Theo10011> Austin: 4.30 ;)

00:06 < Theo10011> AM

00:06 <+sgardner> Sorry; I am just getting organized :-)

00:06 < James_F|Busy> Hey Sue.

00:06 < Austin> Theo: yep, exactly

00:06 < delphine> Theo10011: you're a mess ;)

00:06 < tommorris> Austin: they do have office hours at a variety of

different times

00:06 < tyw7> hi sue

00:06 < Theo10011> hehe

00:07 < aude> Austin: what about south america?

00:07 < Nihiltres> Austin: It's always night somewhere :(

00:07 <+sgardner> Is it 430 for you Theo? You are very impressive.

00:07 < tyw7> sgardner: did you accept my f/r on Facebook ;)

00:07 < Theo10011> Hey delphine

00:07 < Hedgehog456> tyw7: of course not, we need some WP:BEANS for

WP:WEASEL to preserve the WP:PILLARS

00:07 <+sgardner> I don't know tyw7; who are you on FB?

00:07 < tyw7> Thu Win

00:07 < tyw7> :)

00:07 < jeremyb> note to self: ask delphine about tipping in france

(she already mailed about tipping in germany)

00:08 < delphine> jeremyb: easy: be stingy and leave it on the table

when leaving

00:08 < Theo10011> lol

00:08 <+sgardner> Done!

00:08 <+sgardner> (I accepted your friend request, tyw7. Hello :-)

00:08 < Pharos> we have global south in this hemisphere too, ya know :P

00:08 <@StevenW> Austin: it was funny, because last time we did a good

time for Asian folks, it was all night owl Wikipedians from the US and

Canada showed up :)

00:08 < tyw7> hello :)

00:09 < Theo10011> Beria is here to represent that Pharos.

00:09 < tyw7> you can see my Wikipedia page at http://enwp.org/User:Tyw7

00:09 < Beria> i'm?

00:09 < GerardM-> she lives in Portugal and is in the same timezone as me

00:09 <@StevenW> Okay, so to kick us off "officially"

00:09 < Beria> But i'm still brazilian

00:09 < Beria> no matter what people think :P

00:09 < jowen> hello Sue

00:09 <+sgardner> Stopit jowen!

00:10 <+sgardner> Confusing!

00:10 <@StevenW> Just wanted to say that we'd generally like to focus

on the topic of editor retention, but whatever your question is,

either private message it to me or feel free to throw it in the

channel

00:10 < tyw7> what is confusing?

00:10 <+sgardner> James Owen is my assistant tyw7: he's sitting across

from me and we've said hello many times today :-)

00:10 < Nihiltres> tyw7: jowen is presumably sitting nearby sgardner IRL

00:10 < tyw7> problem is that most new editors are there to perform michief

00:10 <+sgardner> He is just teasing me :-)

00:10 < geniice> QUESTION:how many foundation employees have done NPP?

00:10 < GerardM-> tyw7 how do you know that

00:10 < Philippe> Ah, thanks for that tyw7 :P   Turns out you might be wrong....

00:11 <+sgardner> Okay -- so let's begin. I'm curious to know how many

people have here done NPP?

00:11 < tyw7> GerardM-: most vandalism come from new editors

00:11 < GerardM-> what is NPP ?

00:11 < tyw7> and ips

00:11  * Keegan is at the grocery store.  great for all time zones.

00:11 < Hedgehog456> Me!

00:11 < Nihiltres> New Page Patrol

00:11 <@StevenW> NPP = new page patrol GerardM-

00:11 < tyw7> GerardM-: new page patrol

00:11 < Nihiltres> I've dabbled in it a bit

00:11 < tommorris> sgardner: +1

00:11 <+sgardner> geniice: I have. Not for very long though, and I

didn't enjoy it much.

00:11 < Thehelpfulone> GerardM-: WP:NPP - New Page Patrol

00:11 < Philippe> I've done it. :)

00:11 < tyw7> Nihiltres: you beat me with it!

00:11 < Pharos> done it a bit

00:11 < Hedgehog456> I've done it occasionally

00:11 < Fluffernutter> sgardner: i tried NPP. Quit after NEWT scared

the hell out of me.

00:11  * mindspillage has not done it in a long time.

00:11 < tyw7> I did it for a little

00:11 < Hedgehog456> In a negative way

00:11 < Alchimista> me also, i've reverted more than 200 newbies per day :S

00:11  * aude has and speedy deletions

00:11 < delphine> ok, and now, what is New Page patrol

00:11 <+sgardner> what's NEWT?

00:11 < GerardM-> tyw7 but it does not follow that most new editors

want mischief

00:11 < tyw7> and who's minding #wikipedia-en-help?

00:11 < Pharos> it was awhile ago

00:11 < Theo10011> BTW Dispenser was here earlier talking about new

editors, I wonder if he's still around.

00:11 < Hedgehog456> Looking for things to CSD

00:11 < Thehelpfulone> tyw7: minding it? I help :)

00:11 < Keegan> me!

00:11 < aude> try to save stuff, see what can be rescued

00:12 < wizardist> is this discussion about enwiki only?

00:12 < Fluffernutter> sgardner: NEWT was the breaching experiment

some experienced users ran on en.wp where they faked being new

accounts and named and shamed editors who CSD tagged their new

articles

00:12 <@StevenW> No wizardist

00:12 < Theo10011> Hola Keegan.

00:12  * Thehelpfulone waves to Keegan - lies!

00:12 < tyw7> Thehelpfulone: who's there to help those who need help...

00:12 <+sgardner> wizardist: No, it's not intended to be.

00:12 < tommorris> sgardner: WP:NEWT

00:12 < wizardist> ok :)

00:12 < Nihiltres> w:en:WP:NEWT :P

00:12 < tommorris> sgardner: I do a bit of NPPing. I did a lot a while back

00:12 < delphine> links

00:12 < delphine> real links help

00:12 < delphine> :P

00:12 <+sgardner> Fluffernutter: oh, AKA the newbie treatment at CSD

study? Is it the same thing?

00:12 <@StevenW> This is officially one of the biggest office hours

we've had in months

00:12 < Thehelpfulone> tyw7: we have a wide range of helpers, you can

see them on the access list, plus loads of people who have ?iki?edia

cloaks who aren't on there

00:12 < Nihiltres> sgardner: yes

00:12 < tommorris> sgardner: yes

00:12 < Fluffernutter> sgardner, yes, same thing

00:12 < tyw7> Thehelpfulone: I mean who's there atm?

00:12 < Shirley> Hey Thehelpfulone.

00:12 <+sgardner> That was such an interesting study.

00:12 <@StevenW> So let's be sure to try and get focused somewhat if

there's a question

00:13 < Thehelpfulone> hi Shirley :)

00:13 < tommorris> sgardner: lots of people have criticisms of NEWT

00:13 < aude> barnstars for Thehelpfulone ! awesome work in the help channel

00:13 <+sgardner> Okay let me ask this. Just out of curiosity, has

anyone here ever done NPP anywhere _other_ than enWP?

00:13 < tommorris> sgardner: but that's WP. what do you expect

00:13 < tyw7> Pharos: linked me to this sneaky chart

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Edit_pie_chart.jpg

00:13 < Thehelpfulone> thank you aude :)

00:13 < tommorris> sgardner: I've done some NPP on simple-wp

00:13 < Shirley> NPP --> new page patrol

00:13 < Alchimista> sgardner: me, on pt.wp

00:13 < geniice> done NPP on and off over the years

00:13 < delphine> sgardner: I still don't know what New Page Patrol really is

00:13 < tyw7> I did some NPP at en wiki

00:13 < tommorris> sgardner: plus on wikinews, but that's a different

matter entirely

00:13 <+sgardner> tommorris: yeah, I know. People felt hoodwinked,

ambushed. But despite that, I thought the results were interesting

anyway.

00:13 < Logan_> StevenW: maybe I shouldn't have mentioned it in #wikipedia-en :P

00:13 < tyw7> delphine: patrol new pages...

00:13 < wizardist> sgardner: hardly ever at be-x-old.wiki

00:13 < tyw7> to se whether they are note worthy

00:13 < BarkingFish> I've done NPP on tpi.wikipedia and on en.wikinews

00:14 <+sgardner> TimStarling!!

00:14 <+sgardner> Hello :-)

00:14 < RoanKattouw> Basically it's patrolling except it's for page creations

00:14 < delphine> ok, so it's just a regular thing, nothing with

millions of rules and stuff?

00:14 <@StevenW> Yes, what Roan said.

00:14 < Nihiltres> it's interesting because there's definitely a lot

more "established editor" stereotyping than we might want to think

00:14 < TimStarling> hello sgardner

00:14 < tommorris> delphine: New Page Patrollers basically check new

pages. if they meet the standards for inclusion in WP, they click

"mark as patrolled". otherwise, they'll often nom it for deletion,

stick cleanup tags over it, or, maybe, just maybe, make it better

00:14 < RoanKattouw> The only special things are 1) there's no

previous version, so no diff and 2) it can be enabled/disabled

separately from regular patrolling

00:14 < Nihiltres> not that that is entirely a bad thing, but it can be

00:14 < delphine> tommorris: my hearty thanks

00:14 < Ironholds> tommorris: unless the admin is being an idiot ;p

00:15 < aude> question: what's the status of pending changes (on

enwiki, but especially other wikis)

00:15 <+sgardner> (Tim. Nice to see you! I see Evelyn pictures on FB

all the time, it makes me happy :-)

00:15 <@StevenW> So I got a question from BarkingFish that is pretty

good and I want to throw it in here

00:15  * aude thinks it's horribly broken on arabic wikipedia but

isn't involved enough to address problems

00:15 <@StevenW> "In the light of the recent discussions on

en.wikipedia concerning restricting direct article creation to

autoconfirmed users and upwards, do you feel that this is an

appropriate step to be taking, when our aim is to help new users, not

place barriers in their way?"

00:15 < Logan_> sgardner: May I introduce myself to you?  I'm

User:Logan on Wikipedia.

00:15 <+sgardner> Hello Logan: nice to meet you :-)

00:15 < tyw7> Logan_: what's with the underscore?

00:15 < Logan_> sgardner: Nice to meet you too. :)

00:15 < Ironholds> StevenW: the answer is "no" but, well, I *would* say that :P

00:16 < tyw7> sgardner: I'm User:Tyw7 on enwp and commons

00:16 < Logan_> tyw7: hmm?

00:16 < GerardM-> Logan_ what Wikipedia ?

00:16 < Thehelpfulone> Logan_: on your nick

00:16 < tyw7> Logan_: why are you using Logan_ and not Logan

00:16 <+sgardner> BarkingFish, can I ask you first: what do you think of it?

00:16 < Thehelpfulone> GerardM-: the English one

00:16 < Logan_> GerardM-: en.wiki

00:16 < tommorris> One thing that needs to be taken into account in

disucssion of NPP is that a lot of users who aren't newbies but are

learning the ropes start with NPPing. It was the first thing I did

when I started editing again in November after I got fed up with

Citizendium

00:16 < aude> http://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%AA%D8%A3%D9%85%D9%8A%D9%86

00:16 < aude> page last approved on october 4!

00:16 < Logan_> Thehelpfulone, tyw7: "Logan" is registered and active

on freenode.

00:16 < Nihiltres> I don't want outright *barriers* to newbie editing

or page creation, but *funnels* that push them towards good practices

would help

00:16 < Thehelpfulone> Logan_: /nick Logan

00:16 < Ziko_> Nihiltres: Indeed.

00:17 < Philippe> Can I ask that we not go nuts with side conversations?

00:17 < GerardM-> Hoi Ziko

00:17 < BarkingFish> sgardner: Personally, I've been a strong opponent

of the idea.  I don't like the fact that we're pushing new editors

through a process of "if you want to create an article, either you

wait 4 days, or you let us check it first."

00:17 < Ziko_> hi gerardm

00:17 < Thehelpfulone> Philippe: indeed, sorry

00:17 < Pharos> i think new barriers are helpful too

00:17 < Nihiltres> e.g. a rule *for your new article to stick it

should have 3 good references*

00:17 < Tyw7|pingme> but don't make them too complicated

00:17 < Tyw7|pingme> like the pending changes

00:17 < Ziko_> My impression is that "openess" leads easily to "being

lost" and "invited to fail"

00:17 < Fluffernutter> Nihiltres: we have rules requiring referencing.

people just don't follow them.

00:17 < GerardM-> Nihiltres that sucks

00:17  * StevenW listens to Sue typing an answer to BarkingFish's question :)

00:17 < Pharos> time to open up a bit like the old days

00:17 < Tyw7|pingme> which IMO would drive new editors away

00:18 <+sgardner> BarkingFish: I haven't read the proposal, or the

comments people have made on it. But at face value, my gut reaction is

that I agree with you: creating new barriers doesn't seem likely to

help with new editor retention.

00:18 < Tyw7|pingme> cause their edits doesn't appear

00:18 < Nihiltres> GerardM-: just an example idea

00:18 < BarkingFish> I'm not impressed that we're putting restrictions

on editors which the current users of Wikipedia (speaking as a 6 year

user), didn't have to go through ourselves.

00:18 < tommorris> the thing is the current WP:BITE behaviour

makes me think twice about creating new pages and I've got 5,000+

edits under my belt ;-)

00:18 < BarkingFish> My first contribution as an account holder on

Wikipedia was the creation of an article. It's still there 6 years

later

00:18 < Hedgehog456> BarkingFish: you suggest we do it a different way?

00:18 -!- mode/#wikimedia-office [+o Philippe] by ChanServ

00:18 < Prodego> Philippe: +m works...

00:18 < Fluffernutter> BarkingFish: the same could be said of almost

any guideline we've implemented in the past ten years. Old users

create the guidelines, new users then have to follow them

00:18 <+sgardner> BarkingFish: I think that's a good point. I think

the new editor experience on Wikipedia today is very different from

the new editor experience on Wikipedia three four or five years ago.

00:18 < Hedgehog456> Make the same restriction for all?

00:18 <@StevenW> that's a great point tommorris

00:18 <@Philippe> Prodego: That doesn't allow for discussion of the

question at hand though. :)

00:19 <+sgardner> Fluffernutter: there used to be fewer guidelines though.

00:19 < Pharos> we were attracted by the original open culture, we

shouldn't be closing the gate behind us

00:19 < YairRand> "Your new article does not have any references. Save

anyway? (Yes) (No) (Learn more about references)"

00:19 <+sgardner> Pharos: I agree.

00:19 < Tyw7|pingme> and simplify all the rules and regulations

00:19 < Thehelpfulone> sgardner: at WP:ACC, Request an Account on

the English Wikipedia, when new accounts are created for users I think

hardly any of them login! Are we looking at keeping editors who make

the first step or getting those who make an account to contribute?

00:19 < Fluffernutter> YairRand: And what do we do when they click "Yes"?

00:19 < Jsharpminor2> +1 YairRand

00:19 < geniice> people actualy read the  guidelines?

00:19 < Prodego> I'm not sure this does either

00:19 < tommorris> Instead of just plonking out an article and working

on it, I'll store it up in a text editor until I'm sure it's long

enough an NPPer won't delete it

00:19 <+sgardner> StevenW has some interesting information about new

editors' first edits.

00:19 < tommorris> which is kinda stupid. it's a wiki. AGF!

00:19 < Jsharpminor2> Fluffernutter: Move the article to AfC

00:19 < YairRand> Fluffernutter: then we're toast. but that happens anyways

00:19 < Theo10011> Hello Alan____

00:19 < jorm> AfC is where articles go to die.

00:19 < BarkingFish> Hedgehog456: I think there are better ways of

helping new users than putting fences up that they have to jump over

first.

00:19 <+sgardner> (tommorris: I do that too.)

00:19 <@Philippe> StevenW.... what do you have?

00:19 < Logan_> jorm: What makes you say that?

00:20 < Alan___> Hi theo

00:20 < GerardM-> what is AfC ?

00:20 < derp> howdy sgardner :)

00:20 < Hedgehog456> BarkingFish: what if we help them over the fence?

00:20 < tommorris> GerardM-: Articles for Creation

00:20 < Alan___> Hi Delphine too :)

00:20 <+sgardner> derp! :-)

00:20 <@StevenW> Okay

00:20 < Ironholds> sgardner knows derp. The end is nigh.

00:20 < Hedgehog456> With holes like WP:AFC and WP:WIZ

00:20 < Nihiltres> I like YairRand's reference prompter idea

00:20 <+sgardner> I know Ironholds too :-)

00:20 < delphine> oh my, recrudescence of Canadians ;)

00:20 < BarkingFish> Hedgehog456: We can help them over the fence, but

without herding them all through a narrow passage like sheep.

00:20 < tommorris> GerardM-: a process so that unregistered users can

submit articles and have them checked over by a user

00:20 < Hedgehog456> Ironholds: why :D

00:20 < jorm> I've been watching the lifecycle of several articles in

AfC.  Some were good, but they were rejected.  They might have

survived if they were just created in main space.

00:20 < Fluffernutter> everybody knows Ironholds, sgardner :P

00:20 <@StevenW> Yeah so we sometimes hear people wonder whether it's

fine we reject a lot of newbies, because most of their edits are

really bad and don't actually help improve the encyclopedia

00:20 < Logan_> GerardM-: AfC is Articles for Creation - it is a way

on en.wiki to have IP editors and unconfirmed users create articles

with reviewers' guidance.  enwp.org/WP:AFC

00:20 < Tyw7|pingme> Hedgehog456: what is wiz?

00:20 < GerardM-> Sue ... the problem is not confined to en,wp and as

always it seems to occupy everyones attention

00:20 < Hedgehog456> BarkingFish: which is what we should do

00:20 < Ironholds> sgardner: and you don't hate me! that raises

questions about your mental health, not questions about armageddon :P

00:20 <+sgardner> (StevenW is typing.)

00:20  * jorm does not know Ironholds.

00:20 < Hedgehog456> Tyw7|pingme: The Article Wizard

00:21 < Tyw7|pingme> oh...

00:21 < Ironholds> jorm: you lucky person

00:21 < Tyw7|pingme> never used it honestly

00:21 < Fluffernutter> lol

00:21 < Logan_> Ironholds: XD

00:21 <+sgardner> jorm: you WILL know Ironholds. And actually, I have

told you about him. All good, obviously :-)

00:21 <@StevenW> We decided to do a survey of a random sample of new

editors from this month and actually look at their first edits, see

where they were, and whether they were any good

00:21  * tommorris has looked into AfC and cannot find any motivation

to help with it

00:21 < Nihiltres> StevenW: ignorance can be corrected, less so ignorance

00:21 <@StevenW> and then compare that to say, back in 2004. Just to

pick a time in the page

00:21 < Logan_> tommorris: We have a backlog very often.  Why not help out?

00:21 < Hedgehog456> BarkingFish: but how?

00:21 < Theo10011> wb Ironholds.

00:21 < Nihiltres> *insult

00:21 < Alan___> oh Hi to Sue too

00:21 < Tyw7|pingme> tommorris: me too...

00:21 <+sgardner> (Not really a survey: more an analysis.)

00:21 < Thehelpfulone> GerardM-:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_shortcuts#General_information.2C_help.2C_and_tutorials

- you can CTRL+F the abbreviation :)

00:21 < Nihiltres> d'oh

00:21 <@StevenW> The first results are here:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Edit_pie_chart.jpg

00:21 < Tyw7|pingme> I often edit articles of interest

00:21 < tommorris> Logan_: because it's not something I find

particularly interesting. I don't know why.

00:21  * Alan___ wonders how many members of his constituency are here :)

00:21 < Hedgehog456> Instead of axing an article down, move it to an

incubator and help the user fix it up?

00:21 < Shirley> WE'RE NOT GAINING ENOUGH USERS!!!!!!!!!!!!

00:22 < Tyw7|pingme> Shirley: cite your source!

00:22 <+sgardner> Hey Alan! (This is Canadian Alan, from Berlin, right?)

00:22 < Pharos> Alan of the Frozen North?

00:22 < Tyw7|pingme> Shirley: perhaps its time for Wikipedia ads on TVs :)

00:22 < Alan___> Yes, Sue.. Theo told me about this chat

00:22 < jorm> Logan_: I did for a bit, and then I realized that I was

going to spoil my neutral observation ability on it.

00:22 < Logan_> Hedgehog456: That's an interesting idea.  Should we

utilize the incubator more often to fix up articles that are not ready

for the mainspace?

00:22 < BarkingFish> Hedgehog456: That's the issue.  We need to look

at ways to improve the experience, not make it more restrictive.  It

needs more discussion on other paths.

00:22 < tommorris> erm, guys, all this talk about incubators - you

know that Wikipedia was basically an incubator project for Nupedia.

Now we're talking about having an incubator project for Wikipedia.

D'oh!

00:22 <@StevenW> So it's pretty interesting, because based on that

sample, about half of all edits made by this sample ~150 newbies were

not something needing a rv

00:22 < Shirley> Source? I have plenty of surveys of dubious accuracy

that I can cite all day long!

00:22 < Hedgehog456> Logan_: put ALL articles in the incubator?

00:22 < delphine> StevenW: I launched the idea of an admin IRL

workshop. Idea would be to have admins look at their first edits and

try to imagine if they came across them in wp today

00:22 < delphine> how they would react

00:22  * jorm doesn't want to increase the number of people who join

per day right now since they'll just end up on the cutting room floor.

00:22 < Shirley> Because surveys are like the word of God.

00:22 < Logan_> Hedgehog456: No, I didn't say that.  Just, instead of

deletion is some cases.

00:23 < Alan___> Delphine?  IRL in real life?

00:23 < delphine> and what that teaches them about how they approach newbies

00:23 < Hedgehog456> tommorris: There is one, just no-one ever uses it

00:23 <@Philippe> delphine: I proposed something similiar yesterady :)

00:23 < Logan_> Hedgehog456: It's better than userfication in most AfD

outcomes, in my opinion.

00:23 < Thehelpfulone> Alan___: yep

00:23 < Hedgehog456> Logan_: the incubator EVERYWHERE would be better

00:23 < Prodego> delphine: well I would have gotten rid of myself

00:23 < SpitfireWP> Shirley, 76% of statistics are made up on the spot

00:23 < Shirley> Yes, in-person editing is the way of the future.

00:23 < Prodego> delphine: I've said that for a long time actually

00:23 < Shirley> It scales, it's cost-effective, it's perfect!

00:23 <@StevenW> The same sample of ~150 newbies from 2004 was here:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Edit_pie_chart_2004.jpg

00:23 < Alan___> You know, I am an example of editor who put in 5000

edits and walked away

00:23 < Tyw7|pingme> Philippe: to get new users perhaps Wikimedia can

start advertising on TV and on the internet?

00:23 < Nihiltres> hah, in my newbie days I accidentally got involved

tangentially in an ArbCom case IIRC

00:23 < Logan_> Hedgehog456: Yes, but that would be highly

impractical.  Only the articles pending deletion should go there, and,

of those, the ones that could benefit the most from community work.

00:23 <@Philippe> Tyw7|pingme: It's not about GETTING them... it's

about RETAINING them. :)

00:24 < howief> those charts are fascinating

00:24 < Alan___> The challenge I find in coming back to Wikipedia is

organizing the research to make real contributions to article content

00:24 < GerardM-> You can advertise but how do you get me to write in the en.wp

00:24 <@StevenW> Ah, I got a question

00:24 < Shirley> Charts, surveys, charts, surveys.

00:24 < Tyw7|pingme> Ummm...

00:24 < howief> are we goig to able to do one for 2006?

00:24 <@StevenW> Whoopes

00:24 < GerardM-> if you can not convince me that it is ok to do so ?

00:24 < Tyw7|pingme> give them an article of interst?

00:24 <@StevenW> tab complete failure

00:24 <@Philippe> howief: catch me later, I'll fill you in on the full

plan with that

00:24 <+sgardner> hahaah what is happening StevenW?

00:24 <@StevenW> howief we could for sure

00:24 <@Philippe> as much of it as I know :)

00:24 < howief> awesome :)

00:24 < Tyw7|pingme> is there a chart for 2010 and 2009?

00:25 <@StevenW> Anyway, Thehelpfulone had a question ...

00:25 <@StevenW> "at WP:ACC, Request an Account on the English

Wikipedia, when new accounts are created for users I think hardly any

of them login! Are we looking at keeping editors who make the first

step or getting those who make an account to contribute?"

00:25 <+sgardner> So the gist is: most new edits are good faith and

constructive, am I right? (I am always impatient for the upshot :-)

00:25 <@StevenW> Sue do you have thoughts about that?

00:25 <@Philippe> sgardner: yes, you're right,

00:25 < Shirley> sgardner: No, you're wrong.

00:25 < Thehelpfulone> thanks StevenW

00:25 < Hedgehog456> Logan_: better than having unreliable stubs in articlespace

00:25 < Nihiltres> One thing that I think would really help would be

to encourage social interaction‚Ä¶ e.g. suggest articles that are

similar to articles the user has recently edited, that are being

actively edited by other users

00:25 < Shirley> I wouldn't say most first editors are good faith.

00:25 < Tyw7|pingme> Shirley: I think we are better off deleting users

that have no edits

00:25 < Shirley> At least not without evidence.

00:25 < Tyw7|pingme> and inactive for years or so

00:25 < Hedgehog456> What about C-class articles are released, and FAs

are protected with PC?

00:25 < tommorris> Nihiltres: on that point, the way WikiHow does that

is spectacular

00:25 < Shirley> Tyw7|pingme: That's a great way to lose editors.

00:25 < Tyw7|pingme> to free up namespaces

00:26 < delphine> Nihiltres: I would suggest articles that _aren't_

edited actively ;)

00:26 <+sgardner> Does anyone have the link to the very interesting

page someone made last week, where people talked about what their

first edits were, when they first joined the projects?

00:26 < Shirley> We don't have that many registered users, comparatively.

00:26 < tommorris> Nihiltres: it's not so much social but the

recommendations of "stuff you could write/edit next" is brilliant

00:26 < Nihiltres> tommorris: how do they do that? I haven't been to

WikiHow in a while

00:26 <+sgardner> (I forget who made that page.)

00:26 < Risker> Tyw7, a lot of those people are those who read and

keep watchlists

00:26 < derp> sgardner, whose hockey team are you cheering for during

the playoffs :P

00:26 < Tyw7|pingme> Shirley: but if they haven't made a single edit

for 6 or 7 years...

00:26 < tommorris> Nihiltres: not sure

00:26 < Logan_> Tyw7|pingme: I do not see the comparative advantage of

doing that.

00:26 < Jamesofur> Tyw7|pingme: The charts were randomly users from

April 12th 2011 and April 12th 2004 mostly because we wanted

comparison. We don't have one for others yet though

00:26 < Logan_> Tyw7|pingme: If anything, we want to retain contributors.

00:26 < tommorris> sgardner: it's part of the Wiki Guides thing

00:26 <@StevenW> sgardner, I think it's this?

00:26 <@StevenW>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Wiki_Guides/What_was_your_new_user_experience

00:26 < ChristineM> Tyw7: in that case, it'd be hard for people to come back

00:26 < jorm> Users with accounts and no edits are what we call

"candidates".   there are lots of them.  and there are many reasons

why they have 0 edits.

00:26 < Tyw7|pingme> Logan_: but then users can't have the username they want

00:26 < Risker> thanks for the pie charts....Our gut instinct that

vandalism has massively increased is borne out

00:26 < ChristineM> i created my account in '08, and then didn't use

it again until late last year

00:26 < Logan_> Tyw7|pingme: That is what CHU is for ;)

00:26 < Nihiltres> delphine: but that's an isolating effect‚Ä¶ it

would make Wikipedia feel lonely! :(

00:26 < Tyw7|pingme> also there are tons of usless usernames such as ! and $

00:27 < Shirley> I think the real solution is to form more committees

and mailing lists.

00:27 < ChristineM> i'd have been sad if i had to start all over again

00:27 < Pharos> ooo, idea

00:27 < mindspillage> Tyw7|pingme: and then they don't get attributed

in they way they wanted to be attributed for what they di do, either.

00:27 < Fluffernutter> tommorris: Similar discussion on

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Village_pump_%28proposals%29/Proposal_to_require_autoconfirmed_status_in_order_to_create_articles

00:27 < jorm> Hi Risker.

00:27 < Tyw7|pingme> Logan_: what is CHU?

00:27 < Shirley> And hire a few more consultants.

00:27 <@StevenW> Risker: that's only in registered accounts, remember.

00:27 < Pharos> make new users download a browser add-on

00:27 <@StevenW> We didn't actually measure how much total vandalism goes on

00:27 <+sgardner> tommorris: Yeah that's the page. It is fascinating.

00:27 < Shirley> With a third option of creating and using more

acronyms and initialisms.

00:27 < Thehelpfulone> Tyw7|pingme: change username request I think

00:27 < Tyw7|pingme> Pharos: -1

00:27 < Pharos> or offer them the option anywau

00:27 < Logan_> Tyw7|pingme: Change username - you can change your

username to another one that isn't registered or usurp one that has

hardly/no edits - http://enwp.org/WP:CHU

00:27 < delphine> Nihiltres: but sending a newbie on a heavily edited

article is like sending them to their death :P

00:27 < BarkingFish> brb

00:27 < Logan_> Pharos: Why make them download an add-on?

00:27 < Pharos> a tool to make reading more interesting, and encourage editing

00:27 < Tyw7|pingme> Thehelpfulone: there are tons of users there that

have silly or usless usernames that consist of absurd symbols

00:28 < Tyw7|pingme> that possible fail WP:USERNAME

00:28 < Risker> StevenW, that's kind of my point. It suggests that a

very significant number of new accounts are vandalism-only

00:28 < Shirley> We can re-implement Bonzi?

00:28 < Logan_> Pharos: Then wouldn't it be better integrated into the

interface?

00:28 < Pharos> so we don't lose them so easy

00:28 < Shirley> Was that the purple ape's name?

00:28 < Tyw7|pingme> Pharos: that would put them off...

00:28 < delphine> jorm: do you have some reasons why they don't edit?

00:28 <+sgardner> So it's interesting, right. Because the gist of that

page is that we all made terrible mistakes in the beginning. And many

of us were forgiven, and went on to become constructive editors :-)

00:28 < Tyw7|pingme> Shirley: what is Bozi?

00:28 < jorm> i have some suspicions.

00:28 < Alan___> I think people just need help with building the

articles and the experienced editors need to contribute to the article

instead of spending time arguing on talk pages

00:28 < delphine> (and jorm hi, btw)

00:28 < Nihiltres> delphine: in controversial articles, maybe, but

that's a subset and perhaps we could filter those from the suggestion

system a little

00:28 < Shirley> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BonziBUDDY

00:28 <+sgardner> Risker: about a quarter are vandalism, right?

00:28 < Shirley> We need a Wikipetan equivalent.

00:28 < Alan___> Take for example the Qubec City article

00:28 < Theo10011> Hey WittyLama

00:28 < Logan_> sgardner: But of course.  Some of the first articles

that I wrote were speedy deleted just because I wasn't aware of the

criteria at the time.

00:28 <@StevenW> Risker: yes, about 20%. But way way more are not only

good faith, but making content that isn't too terrible.

00:28 < Alan___> I am trying to bring it up to GA

00:28 < Logan_> Shirley: No thanks :P

00:28 < Shirley> A quarter of all statistics are made up.

00:28 < Tyw7|pingme> Shirley: but most users won't install adons

00:28 < Tyw7|pingme> at least I don't

00:28 < jorm> there are many, many people who create accounts so that

they can "be supportive".

00:29 < Tyw7|pingme> I keep adons to a minimum

00:29 < Alan___> I go into the article and start trying to bring it up

to par as per the GA Review

00:29  * mindspillage wonders if only people with interesting first

edit stories contributed to that page.

00:29 < tommorris> I think that one of the interesting things about

the new editor discussion is that it parallels that of the problems

for expert editors and that is WP:BOLD is problematic for new

users *and* expert users.

00:29 <+sgardner> Logan: exactly. I think the point of the page is

that we were all clueless once. So we should have sympathy for the

clueless today :-)

00:29 < Risker> StevenW, it is still an important factor.  Do we have

much data on the edits of IP editors?

00:29 < Alan___> And I had two people jump on the talk page and insult

my choice of pictures to keep versus remove

00:29 < tommorris> We want people to BE BOLD but we don't want them to

do it until they've had some experience of how WP operates

00:29 < Thehelpfulone> Pharos: browser addon? Then updates to that

won't work - there are loads of users of IE who haven't updated for a

while

00:29 <@StevenW> Not nearly as much as we should Risker

00:29 <@Philippe> Risker, not yet

00:29 < Alan___> They didn't make a single contribution to the

article, but saw fit to beat me up for my choice of photos

00:29 < tommorris> you should lurk and learn, then be bold

00:29 < Shirley> Nobody's listening to my suggestions. :-(

00:29 <@Philippe> That's in the Grand Evil Plan.

00:29 < Shirley> And they're so good!

00:29 <+sgardner> mindspillage: yeah, there is probably some truth to that.

00:29 < Nihiltres> tommorris: +1

00:29 < Hedgehog456> Shirley: what are they?

00:29 < Shirley> Heh, Wikimedia's Grand Evil Plan: more consultants.

00:29 < Logan_> sgardner: Yes, it is interesting to regard new editors

from that viewpoint.  We should help them along more, but it becomes

so difficult with even the evident onslaught of new articles at AfC.

00:29 < tommorris> by "be bold" we don't mean go into the article on

Israel and replace it all with an anti-Semitic rant.

00:29 < Shirley> Hedgehog456: Read scrollback.

00:29 < Alan___> This is the type of issues that is holding people

back from making real content contribution.  It's disheartening to put

the effort in to tackle a big problem and only be heckled for your

efforts.

00:29 <@StevenW> Part of it that makes it hard to measure IP editors

is that one IP could represent any number of people, or a single

person's IP could change

00:30 < jorm> Shirley, you're not being constructive right now.

00:30 < Pharos> yes, updates are an issue, but we're "losing" over 90%

of new editora- and we shouldn't be

00:30 < Hedgehog456> Shirley: I hate scrollback. Tell me in query then.

00:30 < Tyw7|pingme> more automaic bots to tag potientially un

noteworthy new pages?

00:30 < Prodego> Pharos: why shouldn't we be?

00:30 < Shirley> jorm: You don't like my idea of a Wikipetan version

of BonziBUDDY? I'm hurt.

00:30 < Alan___> More automatic bots is another problem

00:30 < jorm> god no.  more bot tagging will be bad.

00:30 < Alan___> We need more constructive edits and less tagging

00:30 < Alan___> Less talk page, more article

00:30 < jorm> i can guarantee you that auto-tags are horrible.

00:30 < Pharos> because new editors are useful resources

00:31 < Tyw7|pingme> jorm: bots... or at least add a cat to warn admins

00:31 < Ziko_> hello, some people here are non native speakers of

english and have difficulties to follow. dropping the joke message

might help. thank you

00:31 < Logan_> sgardner: Furthermore, I've been seeing recently that

new editors have seen Wikipedia as a vehicle for promotion, which

makes it hard for us at #wikipedia-en-help and AfC to assume good

faith with new articles.  How would you suggest fixing that issue?

00:31 < Alan___> What I need as a returning editor is someone to help

me find sources for City articles

00:31 <+sgardner> So if StevenW's analysis shows that a quarter of

people's first edits are vandalism.... what do we make of that? Does

that seem high or low?

00:31 < tommorris> "be bold" and "anyone can edit" only works if you

have the old-fashioned Internet assumption of lurking and learning the

ropes. In an era of Facebook basically serving everything up on a

plate, the principle that you lurk and learn before jumping in has

been lost

00:31 < Alan___> I was trying to find information to build up the

article, but I was really lost on where to look

00:31 < Logan_> I am sure that KFP can concur with me on that statement.

00:31 < Tyw7|pingme> Logan_: delete all promotional articles?

00:31  * Tyw7|pingme is having a hard time to keep up!!!

00:31 < Fluffernutter> tommorris++

00:31 <@StevenW> Not just my analysis, more like a few people. :)

00:31 < tommorris> sgardner: that seems about right with my experience

NPPing and RCing

00:31 < Alan___> A guide with the Wikiproject Cities, etc ... would

have helped me a great deal

00:31 <+sgardner> Logan: is there an increase in people wanting to use

Wikipedia for promotional reasons, do you think?

00:31 < Prodego> Pharos: yes, but if only 10% want to edit an

encyclopedia getting 10% is getting them all

00:31 < mindspillage> Hm. I don't think automatic tools are inherently

horrible. They're useful. But you can't let the bots do all the

interacting--it has to be obvious that there's a human at the other

end, and how to talk to them--and that they are going to be there and

respond in a human fashion.

00:31 < Hedgehog456> Shirley: no malwares on the 'pedia

00:31 < Logan_> sgardner: Yes, definitely.  How can we change that image?

00:32 < Wizardman> on the 25% mark, I would have expected it to be

higher, so thatis interesting

00:32 < geniice> sgardner thats been pretty constant for some years

00:32 < Prodego> Pharos: you can't assume every person who edits once

would have contributed if x, y, or z

00:32 < BarkingFish> sgardner: I'd say that's pretty low, considering

sometimes we get a few hundred people a day registering new accounts.

00:32 < Tyw7|pingme> mindspillage: how about all the generic welcome messages?

00:32 < geniice> sgardner difference is they are getting smarter at doing it

00:32 < tommorris> BUT forcing people to lurk means that anyone who

doesn't need to lurk gets screwed, and we lose potentially valuable

contributors

00:32 <@Philippe> I agree, BarkingFish  :)

00:32 < Logan_> sgardner: If you just idle in #wikipedia-en-help, I'd

say that 75% of the help requests include people complaining that

articles about their own companies were deleted.

00:32 <+sgardner> tommorris: It's interesting because in a previous

chat, or maybe on a list somewhere, I think someone guessed (maybe

facetiously) 99% of first edits were vandalism.

00:32 <@Philippe> geniice: not really, not based on the ones I saw.

00:32 < Risker> geniice, it's a rather massive leap from 2004, but I

think the real turning point was late 2006/early 2007

00:32 < Tyw7|pingme> BarkingFish: but I presume most new editors edit via ips

00:32 < geniice> Risker yes

00:32 < mindspillage> Tyw7|pingme: what about them?

00:32 < jorm> mindspillage:  the most common interaction for a new

editor is a reversion via huggle/twinkle and then a talk page template

saying "thanks but no thanks."

00:32 < Tyw7|pingme> mindspillage: what about what?

00:32 < Jamesofur> BarkingFish: We had 2000 new accounts (who edited)

the day we made the 2011 chart

00:32 < DanielB> observation: trying to follow a conversation in here

is headache-inducing

00:32 < geniice> Philippe people promote things in ways I can't delete on sight

00:32 <@StevenW> geniice, it was interesting, because when we looked

at 2004, the amount of vandalism was way lower. Like 2% of first edits

by accounts. Maybe there was just more IP vandalism, we don't know.

00:32 < Jamesofur> it's around that every day

00:32 <+sgardner> geniice: yeah, that's not surprising.

00:32 < Thehelpfulone> I would agree with Logan on that, I refer many

people to WP:COI = Conflict of Interest

00:33 < BarkingFish> Tyw7|pingme: That's true. I edited as an IP for

almost 8 months before registering an account

00:33 < Tyw7|pingme> so its hard to count the edits from new editors

00:33 < geniice> StevenW in 2004 manual RC patrol was doable

00:33 < Prodego> BarkingFish: and I did not. One datapoint does not

make something true

00:33 <@StevenW> Yeah

00:33 < Tyw7|pingme> when you are supporting and promoting ip edits

00:33 < jorm> So, okay.  What would make RC patrol easier?

00:33 < Prodego> geniice: even in late 2005 it was

00:33 < Theo10011_> I went close to two years with anon edits before

registering.

00:33 < Prodego> geniice: though not easily

00:33 < BarkingFish> I got into the swing of things first, worked my

way round wikicode, asked questions and then registered an account

00:33 < Tyw7|pingme> jorm: automatic tools...

00:33 <@StevenW> +1 to jorm's question

00:33 < jorm> that automate what?

00:33 <+sgardner> Theo10011: me too. Why did you edit as an IP for so long?

00:34 < Risker> geniice, I think it would be do-able today too, if the

manual editors weren't being walloped by all those using scripts

00:34 < geniice> jorm everything

00:34 < mindspillage> jorm: right. There's no indicating that there's

anything personal or considered there. But then a person writing

manually would end up saying basically the same thing; you don't know

the individual and have to file it in a category in your mind, too:

test edit, or vandalism, or who knows what.

00:34 < jorm> i'm seriously asking this because i think a lot of

newbie bite comes from oldbie frustration with tools.

00:34 < Logan_> jorm: Maybe a clearer indication of a user's

experience and automatically suggested ways to respond to edits that

look like vandalism from said user?  I'm not sure how that could be

coded, though.

00:34 < Theo10011> sgardner:I would only make incidental edits I came

across. vandal revert and the likes.

00:34 <+sgardner> (I did it because I was lurking, testing, learning

the rules. I did not want to be exposed to ridicule or criticism, espy

since Wikipedia retains it forever.)

00:34 < tommorris> jorm: something like patrolled edits. to know that

if I punt on a particular decision whether to rollback/warn/whatever,

that someone else will catch it. Pending Changes does this to some

extent, but is not the only way to implement it

00:34 < jorm> it can be coded.  anything can be coded, with enough resources.

00:34 < geniice> mindspillage thats were the test templates came from

00:34 < Tyw7|pingme> I think auto scripts and bots to perform tedious

things would free up editor's time to do usefull things

00:34 <+sgardner> Theo10011: but why? Just because you weren't that engaged?

00:34 < jorm> Logan_: I've been thinking about something that does

just that, actually.

00:34 < Hedgehog456> Tyw7|pingme: Cluebot NG

00:34 < geniice> Tyw7|pingme already exist

00:34 < BarkingFish> jorm: That's very true. I admit to having bitten

more than a few new users in the past, and this is why I'm interested

in finding better ways to help them.

00:34 < jorm> Sue's idea, but I'm running with it.

00:35 < Theo10011> at that point, I felt I didn't have a lot to contribute

00:35 <+sgardner> jorm: I've been thinking about how to make RC patrol

better :-)

00:35 < jorm> sec.

00:35 < Logan_> jorm: Huh, interesting.

00:35 < Theo10011> and didn't have enough time.

00:35 < Tyw7|pingme> BarkingFish: better generic templates?

00:35 < jorm> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/-1_to_100

00:35 < Prodego> sgardner: make it collaborative, and that's about it

00:35 < Tyw7|pingme> much more openess to the help channels

00:35 < BarkingFish> Tyw7|pingme: I'd say lose the templates

altogether with newcomers

00:35 < geniice> sgardner http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Twinkle

00:35 < mindspillage> I think that a person who doesn't know what

she's dealing with is no better at interacting with newbies than a

template message is.

00:35 < Tyw7|pingme> sgardner: How about more opness to the help

channels and a "help section" plastered in the nav bar

00:35 < jorm> okay.  so, 1:1 stuff?  chats, or maybe mentorship programs?

00:35 < BarkingFish> You can't be personal with someone by slapping a

whopping great box on their page

00:36 < delphine> We need to start an AA (admin anonymous) club. I've

read how many times tonight "I have bitten newbies too"

00:36 < Logan_> jorm: I've just been trying to brainstorm recently how

we can make editors seem more personal on Wikipedia.  Since there are

so many edits at once, especially on en.wiki, you lose that sense of,

"Hey, he's a new editor and may need some help."  Thus, we need an

automated way to determine how to respond to newer editors in a

personal manner, if anything.

00:36 < delphine> ?

00:36 < BarkingFish> if they need personal help, be personal.

00:36 < Prodego> RC patrol is 1 person vs a massive stream of edits.

You can't see what the many others patrolling have checked or are

doing

00:36 < GerardM-> just read that IPv6 addresses will be mandatory in

Asia because they ran out of IPv4 addresses

00:36 <@StevenW> lol delphine

00:36 <+sgardner> jorm: StevenW's new analysis suggests to me that

it's correct for patrollers to warn/revert the 23% of edits that are

vandalism., and it's correct to lightly warn/correct the behaviour of

the low quality edit people....

00:36 < Nihiltres> While there are surely usability issues with IRC,

[insert net newbie litany here], #wikipedia-en-help is a great

resource

00:36 < Prodego> but that requires someone write a very interesting program

00:36 < Tyw7|pingme> BarkingFish: but if you explain everything in

detail in the template...

00:36 < Prodego> which won't happen

00:36 < Alan___> I agree the templates are not helpful

00:36 < Logan_> Uh, well, may not be the best time to mention this,

but there's a 4chan attack thread...

00:36 < jorm> So, okay.  One of the ideas being kicked around is an

automatic "new user" flag.  it sets people more obviously as newbies,

and might give them a chance to say a bit about themselves.

00:36 < Tyw7|pingme> if I type it, it may be offensive or I may miss

out some points

00:36 < Alan___> You feel rubber stamped when someone puts a template on you

00:36 <+sgardner> But what I really took away from the analysis is

that our tools need to be capable of thanking and praising the 57% of

first edits that are good. That to me is th epiece that's currently

missing.

00:36 < tommorris> BarkingFish and others: what's the alternative to

templates though? When I did NPPing, I'd do 50-100 pages a day, with

potentially that many IPs behind them. Am I supposed to write each of

them a damn essay?!

00:37 < delphine> I have a theory which says that Wiki editing is

actually a lonesome task. You _could_ actually go on for ever and edit

without having to talk to anyone.

00:37 < tommorris> s/IPs/users/g

00:37 < Alan___> Number 1, when you see a template it feels like they

didn't look hard enough to care enough to write a comment

00:37 < delphine> The asynchronous things does that.

00:37 < Tyw7|pingme> tommorris: +1

00:37 < jorm> youtube is doing a "send you to school when you screw up

too much" thing.

00:37 < delphine> -s

00:37 < Tyw7|pingme> tommorris: more personal templates?

00:37 < tommorris> how personal can you get though?

00:37 <@StevenW> tommorris makes a good point. There's no way to

handle that scale of patrolled pages in a personable way.

00:37 < jorm> the whole "Gratitude" spike.

00:37 < Tyw7|pingme> like replacing the hello user with the user's actual name?

00:37 < geniice> jorm it's called a redlinked user page

00:37 < Logan_> jorm: +1 about that new user flag.

00:37 < mindspillage> yeah, totally. I am guilty of nly feeling moved

to comment on something when something has gone wrong--good things

don't need correction, they can happily happen! But you don't know

that those people who are doing good things are feeling unsure, or

unwelcome, or...

00:37 < Tyw7|pingme> to seem "personal"

00:37 <+sgardner> (catching up reading. Delphine that's funny: AA for

newbie biters :-)

00:37 < jorm> geniice:  my first edit was my user page.

00:37 < Alan___> Even if it's a personal template, it is still a

template and you feel like you have been tagged by a robot

00:37 < BarkingFish> tommorris: maybe if we keep the templates, we

need to reword them to be a little more polite than they are, and a

lot easier to understand.

00:38 < geniice> jorm most people's isn't

00:38 < Tyw7|pingme> my first edit was... idk what was my first edit

00:38 < jorm> what if you could "thank" someone for a revision?

00:38 < Ziko_> my old idea is to force people to get an account so

that you can at least communicate with them better, and they build up

a wiki editing history

00:38 < mindspillage> So totally agree that there should be more

"thank you" intereaction, especially in someone's first few forays

into editing.

00:38 < delphine> jorm: mine too. My second was a whole article.

00:38 < delphine> Those were the days.

00:38 < Nihiltres> mindspillage: good idea

00:38 < ChristineM> What if NPP worked differently? Like, say for a

new page to be deleted, several NPP'ers would have to agree

00:38 < Tyw7|pingme> Alan___: and BarkingFish make exerlent suggstions

00:38 < ChristineM> that could give each page more eyes

00:38 < mindspillage> My first edit was a totally correctly-formatted

paragraph in an existingarticle. I am boring. :-)

00:38 < geniice> ChristineM nope

00:38 < James_F|Busy> mindspillage> A "like this" feature on edits?

00:38 < Tyw7|pingme> ChristineM: that would produce more backlogs

00:38 < Thehelpfulone> ChristineM: it would take too long I guess

00:38 < geniice> ChristineM most deleted stuff is utter junk

00:39 < mindspillage> James_F|Busy: less facebooky. :-)

00:39 < Doh5678> What about having a peronal user template?

00:39 < Logan_> ChristineM: No, per Tyw7|pingme .

00:39 < Nihiltres> my first edit was to add a wikilink. I am a

natural-born wikignome :P

00:39 < geniice> Doh5678 alread xist

00:39 < Tyw7|pingme> Problems with impleting more checks is backlogs

00:39 < James_F> mindspillage> My wording was deliberately intended to

get that reaction. :-)

00:39 < geniice> exist

00:39 < Logan_> ChristineM: We have enough backlogs already ;)

00:39 < Tyw7|pingme> Logan_: no what?

00:39 < jorm> I don't think that "like" is the right term.

00:39 < mindspillage> James_F: troll.

00:39 < geniice> Doh5678 you just keep them as a sub page of your userspace

00:39 < Theo10011> Dispenser was here earlier complaining that the

current welcome method on en.wp is like someone running up in the

middle of the street to someone and then running away after saying Hi.

00:39 <@StevenW> Yeah it seems like the ability flag in some way

helpful newbies so that they are easy to spot during NPP etc. would

make it easier to swat vandals while not biting newbies

00:39 < Doh5678> ge

00:39 < tommorris> I reckon we need to start doing "Social Media User

Tracking and Thank You-ing" (or SMUTTY for short) - basically keeping

an eye on sites like Twitter to see people complaining about their

Wikipedia edits getting deleted/reverted and then following up with

them. I've done it once or twice and it's been really positive. and a

few people I know now ask me stuff about WP through Twitter.

00:39 < ChristineM> yeah but "utter junk" is in the eye of the beholder

00:39 < ChristineM> *shrug*

00:39 < Ziko_> Templates are not a good solution, yes. Even short, not

unfriendly, but formal answers can be understood as quite rude by

newbies

00:40 < Alan___> Wow, tracking people on twitter, sounds like the

Conservative Party of Canada

00:40 < aude> tommorris: +1

00:40 < delphine> tommorris: that's cool.

00:40 <@StevenW> I "like" that observation jorm ;)

00:40 < Austin> Theo: well, the alternative would be something like a

mentoring program?

00:40 < Logan_> tommorris: Agree.

00:40 <+sgardner> +1 :-)

00:40 < jorm> Ziko_ is totally correct there.

00:40 < Nihiltres> Alan___: lol

00:40 < geniice> ChristineM nah it the eyes of CSD

00:40 < Alan___> Why do you need to track people?

00:40 < Tyw7|pingme> Ziko_: but templates makes NPP job much easier

00:40 < delphine> tommorris: although I have a creepy experience of my

bank calling me because I complained about them on twitter. Need to

find the right tone.

00:40 < Alan___> Just focus on helping improve articles and giving

guidance to those who are struggling

00:40 < BarkingFish> Austin: We have a mentoring program as I

understand it.  I believe the "adopt a user" program still exists?

00:40 < mindspillage> Los of people's untemplated comments were much

worse that the test templates, before their usage was as widespread.

00:40 <@Philippe> Templates are powerful tools: used carefully,

they're fantastic.  Used poorly, they're a disaster.

00:40 < Tyw7|pingme> Alan___: but do people ever follow up on it?

00:40 < tommorris> Alan___: keep an eye on the twitter stream for

wikipedia, "wikipedia deleted" and stuff like that and follow up with

those people

00:40 < Theo10011> Austin: I have no idea what Dispenser had in mind.

But I'm hoping the welcome template improves.

00:41 < Logan_> BarkingFish: Yes, but it is not as popular as it was

in the past, IIRC.

00:41 < Ziko_> Yes, I am not again templates. Maybe they have to be

rewritten and e.g. explain why we can't give a nice individual

response

00:41 < geniice> mindspillage personal templates were also an issue

00:41 < Tyw7|pingme> I was an adopt a user but dropped as I can't be bothered

00:41 < Austin> BarkingFish: and I'm questioning the effectiveness of it.

00:41 < mindspillage> geniice: that too.

00:41 <@StevenW> BarkingFish: thanks for the reminder about the

adoption program.

00:41 < jorm> So, i'm very interested in talking with pretty much

anyone who wants to talk about their ideas on things regarding this.

Feel free to talk on http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/-1_to_100 (after

we're done here; i'm not walking away or anything)

00:41 < tommorris> Alan___: it's distinctly less creepy than the

Conservative Party of Canada probably do it

00:41 < Thehelpfulone> StevenW: flagging helpful newbies - how would

you define helpful, who would grant the right, etc etc?

00:41 < Tyw7|pingme> Ziko_: but you better put t hat as a small texts

00:41 < Alan___> If you're going to revert someone, put a post on

their talk page

00:41 < delphine> How about no template but a plain and simple "welcome"

00:41 < Alan___> Try to engage people 1 on 1

00:41 < jorm> Most welcome templates are walls of text.  No one reads

them. They're impersonal.

00:41 <@Philippe> Thehelpfulone: I'd be more inclined to define

"helpful" as "Making productive edits"

00:41 < Alan___> You can't catch everyone, but as long as the

community is recruiting new people who learn how to be polite

00:42 < jorm> And it's almost like the first thing that happens to a

new user is that they're told to "Go to School"

00:42 < Austin> They were impersonal from the beginning, really.

00:42 < Alan___> They will spread that attitude and the community moves forward

00:42 < Tyw7|pingme> delphine: just one letter?

00:42  * mindspillage had a personal welcome template. There's only so

much in the way of oroginality you can manage after your 100th time.

00:42 < Tyw7|pingme> welcome....

00:42 < Austin> In 2004 I got my first welcome message from Angela.

00:42 <@StevenW> So we're almost 45 minutes in and there have only

been a few questions

00:42 < jorm> They're kindergartners and we want them to be highschoolers.

00:42 < jorm> as it were.

00:42 < Tyw7|pingme> I got my first welcome message from no one

00:42 <+sgardner> I have a question!

00:42 < Thehelpfulone> Philippe: sounds more logical, but then would

admins grant the right, or would helpful editors themselves/NPP

patrollers grant that right?

00:42 <@StevenW> Shoot.

00:42 < Austin> And I later got to know Angela on IRC, but it really

was the "run up and yell hi at someone in the street" phenomenon.

00:42 <+sgardner> I do! :-)

00:42 < jorm> The chair recognizes Sue Gardner.

00:42 < delphine> Tyw7|pingme: as a first step, that's personal enough

00:42 <+sgardner> yay

00:42 < Alan___> I have a question too

00:42 < James_F> jorm> The social media extension that was talked

about on wikitech-l (from Wikia?) might be a good start.

00:42 <@StevenW> lol jorm

00:42 <+sgardner> Okay, here's my question.

00:42 < Tyw7|pingme> delphine: but a bit boring

00:42 <@Philippe> Good question, Thehelpfulone :)

00:42 < delphine> Tyw7|pingme: welcome, happy to see you here.

00:42 < Tyw7|pingme> and rude...

00:42 <+sgardner> I think the 'first edit story' page was really useful.

00:42 < Tyw7|pingme> delphine: hi :)

00:43 < Tyw7|pingme> sgardner: what is first edit story?

00:43 <+sgardner> And I am really interested in better understanding

the characteristics that suggest people will become great editors.

00:43 < Tyw7|pingme> And IMO most people won't be intersted to tell a

bit of themselves first.. most want to roll their sleves up and dive

right in

00:43 <@StevenW> The page Sue is talking about:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Wiki_Guides/What_was_your_new_user_experience

00:43 < tommorris> sgardner: modesty is a big one for me.

00:43 <+sgardner> Not just the characteristics of the person

themselves ... I am interested in what happens to people in their

early days that helps them become good editors.

00:43 < Nihiltres> StevenW: perhaps we need "un-office hours" called

out where people can ramble about stuff like this and have it

"officially" logged by someone

00:43 <+sgardner> So.... I am assuming that everyone here is an

excellent editor :-)

00:44 < delphine> StevenW: you're the (link) man! Thanks.

00:44 < jorm> "What are the evolutionary traits that make you a survivor"

00:44 < delphine> sgardner: I am a very poor editor.

00:44 < Tyw7|pingme> btw any newbys here?

00:44 < Pharos> probably number is just that they're  really into it

from the beginning

00:44 < Austin> Nihiltres: that would only be effective if anyone read it. :)

00:44 < Tyw7|pingme> sgardner: I'm a poor editor... look at my contributions

00:44 <+sgardner> So I am curious to know: what happened to you in

your early days ... what do you remember that was encouraging to you,

and kept you going until you became successful?

00:44 < Tyw7|pingme> I barely made any edits in the past months

00:44 < Tyw7|pingme> sgardner: nothing...

00:44 < delphine> and frankly, for one, I still have to think, 5 years

later, how to make an outside link to a wiki... ;)

00:44 <+sgardner> (Let's assume we are all excellent editors! :-)

00:44 < tommorris> sgardner: what made me get back into WP was meeting

Wikipedians IRL.

00:44 < Alan___> Obsession!

00:44 < jorm> I started fixing typos.

00:45 < Nihiltres> Austin: the interaction would be the goal, logging

would just be a formality to make it slightly less ephemeral

00:45 < Tyw7|pingme> sgardner: I just wanted to express myself and

change incorrect infos

00:45 <+sgardner> Were you welcomed, were you thanked, did you find a

wikiproject?

00:45 < delphine> sgardner: irc is what hooked me. I came here to ask

for help and got it.

00:45 < Tyw7|pingme> sgardner: I don't believe I was welcomed...

00:45 < BarkingFish> That's another thing I'd like to raise.  Calling

new users "Newbies".  Newbies gets confused so much with "n00b" and

stuff, that it starts to feel a little derogatory at times.  Maybe if

we call them "newcomers" instead?

00:45 < jorm> Many typoes before I felt confident enough to actually

edit something.

00:45 < Keegan_> No, no, and no

00:45 < delphine> but that's a geeky thing. :/

00:45 < mindspillage> I was pretty much totally left alone in my early

days, until I ran across some editors who shared my interests and

leaving friendly comments on talk pages. (I got welcomed maybe 2

months in.)

00:45 < Alan___> Sue: I always appreciated the people who posted on my

talk page to teach me things

00:45 < Tyw7|pingme> BarkingFish: how about student wikipedians?

00:45 < Keegan_> I started poking at people who's names I saw in the history

00:45 < Austin> Nihiltres: well, there's always a space to rant

00:45 < geniice> sgardner I walked into an edit war and was involved

in my first arbcom case within a year

00:45 < Keegan_> Whose

00:45 < delphine> sgardner: that and being a woman. ;) Everyone was

soooo helpful! (really)

00:45 < Alan___> Sue: Templates never impressed me, but the people who

left notes and tried to explain things... they were encouraging

00:46 < Ironholds> geniice: well, you are rather a "what not to do" model ;p

00:46 < Tyw7|pingme> sgardner: I too walked into a arbcom war and walked out...

00:46 < Tyw7|pingme> when things got too heated

00:46 <+sgardner> BarkingFish: I'm sorry. I don't mean it to be

derogatory, but it's true that lots of people think it is. I will try

to stop :-)

00:46 < tommorris> sgardner: for me, what put me off editing was

various objections I had to the very idea of Wikipedia and the

implementation of certain policies and so on. talking to real life WP

editors fixed that for me.

00:46 < geniice> Ironholds hey I wasn't banned as a result of the case

00:46 < WittyLama> I had my userpage replaced by a picture of a Baboon

several times a day for a while when I was newbie and an admin helped

me out, which was nice.

00:46 < BarkingFish> Thank you :)  I appreciate it, sgardner

00:46 < Alan___> LOL Liam

00:46 < Thehelpfulone> sgardner: in my first week of joining the wiki,

I was put straight onto WP:ANI for learning too quickly -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive334#Really.2C_really_advanced_new_user_.28day_8.29

00:46 < Theo10011> lol

00:46 <@StevenW> "A priest and a rabbi walk into an ArbCom War..."

00:46 < Tyw7|pingme> sgardner: how about we call new wikipedians

Student Wikipedians...

00:46 <+sgardner> WittyLama: that is not true!

00:46 <+sgardner> hey jorm has a name for them...

00:46 < Tyw7|pingme> or Learners...

00:46 < Austin> Novices?

00:47 < Thehelpfulone> maybe that suggests a bit more WP:AGF is

required of newbies

00:47 <+sgardner> Freshmen?

00:47 < Nihiltres> WittyLama: yeah, I had a similar experience of one

of my peers pulling stuff like that on me

00:47 < Austin> It doesn't really matter what we call them

00:47 < Theo10011> heh @ freshmen

00:47 < Austin> It's what we do with them that counts :)

00:47 < Thehelpfulone> although that was over 3 years ago ;)

00:47 < delphine> sgardner: what about freshwomen :P

00:47  * mindspillage edited in one of the least contentious areas on

the wiki. That helped too. If I had been a politics junkie....

00:47 < whym> sgardner: In my early days, it was most encouraging to

receive comments from experienced editors in the same domain, far

beter than just a welcome template :)

00:47 < Theo10011> recruits!

00:47 <@Philippe> sgardner - I had someone "signing" my name to talk

page posts I didn't write.  Thank goodness for User:FisherQueen

00:47 <+sgardner> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/-1_to_100/Participant_Lifecycle

00:47 < Pharos> i don't think ppl are offended by "newbie" at all

00:47 < Alan___> +1 to whym

00:47 < Tyw7|pingme> Thehelpfulone: there is so much AGF we can have

before we become ABF

00:47 < Nihiltres> "initiates of the wiki-mysteries" XD

00:47 < Tyw7|pingme> assume bad faith

00:47 < YairRand> the fact that they're so clearly different is the

biggest problem...

00:47 <@Philippe> Pharos: Nah, I've talked to several.

00:48 < jorm> In my user model, new users go through Prospect ->

Candidate -> Freshman -> Sophomore -> Junior -> Senior -> Graduate.

00:48 < Pharos> whenever i use it in person, they smile :)

00:48 <+sgardner> whym: yes. I think that's true for lots of people.

Lots of people say they find barnstars and generic welcoming/thanking

unimpressive.

00:48 < whym> I guess people care more about their writings than themselves

00:48 < Austin> Pharos: I don't think so, either, but whatever the

case, I don't think terminology is the issue

00:48 < Thehelpfulone> jorm: where graduate is?

00:48 < jeremyb> sgardner: BarkingFish: NYC has newbie used in a

positive context: newbie nights to introduce novice editors or people

who've never edited to the community

00:48 < jorm> each "class" has a set of known strengths and vulnerabilities.

00:48 < Nihiltres> Philippe: yeah, same here, but a different

admin/established user

00:48 < jorm> graduate is basically "over 100 edits"

00:48 < Alan___> Oh yeah, barnstars are LAME

00:48 < Keegan_> jorm: so it's a motorcycle club meets high school?

00:48 < Theo10011> that's quasi-military academician jorm

00:48 < aude> best help as a newbieish was mentoring through the FA process

00:48 <@StevenW> Man, I don't want to go back to school...

00:48 < WittyLama> sgardner:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Witty_lama&oldid=50566542

00:48 < jfelipe> sgardner: Hi, Sue. You're also assuming that

Wikipedia is now receiving the same type of new editors that came 5

years ago, right?

00:48 < Austin> Also, we're totally being English Wikipedia-centric, here.

00:48 < jorm> it was better than referring to them by edit count ranges.

00:48 < Thehelpfulone> jorm: you can accumulate that in under 10

minutes with some serious vandal fighting

00:48 < geniice> me I think we need to get back to the old 6 months to

admin cycle

00:48 < aude> after being here for ~1 year

00:48 < Austin> Other Wikipedias already have hierarchies, for instance.

00:48 <+sgardner> Philippe: I remember that happening to me too.

00:49 < Nihiltres> Alan___: barnstars are fun when you're starting out

00:49 < James_F> Austin> Indeed.

00:49 < tommorris> jeremyb and Fluffernutter: how do "newbie nights"

work out in NYC? how do you recruit people?

00:49 < BarkingFish> jeremyb: Ok, so that's a good context, but there

are more unpleasant contexts that it's used in, than good ones.

00:49  * Alan___ looks a Liams picture

00:49 < Nihiltres> later on you know they're just for the fun of it

00:49 < Tyw7|pingme> tommorris: ads?

00:49 < Alan___> Nih, I never liked barnstars

00:49 < jorm> well, it's not just edit count.  it's also a series of

"confidences".  "know what a template is, what a talk page is, etc."

00:49 < Austin> The Chinese Wikipedia has had ranks for years.

00:49 < Tyw7|pingme> give some insentives to recruit new people like games...

00:49 <+sgardner> jfelipe: not necessarily, no. Why?

00:49 < YairRand> if there are 8 levels of cluelessness ranges for

wiki-editing, there's something wrong with the amount of necessary

learning before being unclueless

00:49 <@StevenW> haha nice diff Wittylama

00:49 < Theo10011> +1 to barnstars.

00:49 < Thehelpfulone> Austin: what do the hierarchies consist of?

00:49 < jfelipe> I mean, editors now might have different profile

00:49 < barts1a> I never got a barnstar :(

00:49 < jorm> they are roughly sketched here:

http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/-1_to_100/Participant_Lifecycle

00:49 <+sgardner> YairRand: funny :-)

00:49 < jfelipe> before they could be more tech savvy

00:49 < Nihiltres>  jorm++

00:50 < delphine> barnstars are jargon. And en.wp jargon mainly :/

00:50 < Austin> I was puzzled the first time I saw someone apply for a

Wikimania scholarship and say "I'm a senior chief editor."

00:50 < jfelipe> or have stronger tendency to join a project in earlier stage

00:50 <+sgardner> Austin: wow. I have never heard that.

00:50 < Tyw7|pingme> but hirachy may put some people off..

00:50 < Alan___> Utoh, Delphine are we agreeing on things now?

00:50  * Alan___ smiles

00:50 < Tyw7|pingme> if we have a caste system in Wikipedia

00:50 < Theo10011> delphine they do affect retention, really. :)

00:50 < delphine> Alan___: lol

00:50 < jeremyb> tommorris: well, first of all it's part of an events

series at a coworking space

00:50 <@StevenW> That's kind of crazy Austin

00:50 < jfelipe> but now you cover a broader audience, who may have

different driving incentives to engage in the community

00:50 < Alan___> Ahem

00:50 < Ziko_> Certainly, a personal encouragement is important. Then

again, we often see that after having done so, the newcomer still

leaves. It seems to be wasted time.

00:50 < Alan___> I have a question for the group

00:50 < Alan___> It's a big one for me

00:50  * Philippe has to dash off to a meeting.  See ya'll later. :)

00:50 < Jamesofur> Barnstars and other rewards are good for people at

all levels. Encouragement is incredibly important

00:50 < delphine> Theo10011: it's a highly cultural thing, the

"reward" or recognition thing.

00:51 < jeremyb> tommorris: so it was promoted by them

00:51 < jorm> These terms are internal.  they're useful for us to

think about where someone is in their confidence arc.  they should not

be used as "badges"

00:51  * Jamesofur follows Philippe to the meeting

00:51 <+sgardner> Some people have commented in surveys that they like

it when people do small helpful things to their articles, like adding

categories. They seem to feel like it means they're part of a club;

they find it encouraging. Did that happen for people here?

00:51 < Tyw7|pingme> I have a question...

00:51 < tommorris> jeremyb: coworking space. that's a really good idea

00:51 <+sgardner> Bye Philippe :-)

00:51 < ReaperEternal> Yes it did

00:51 < BarkingFish> Tyw7|pingme: In many respects, considering we

have different usergroups already, admins, reviewers, bureaucrats and

so on, I'd say that a ranking system for new users would simply be

divisive.

00:51 < Tyw7|pingme> StevenW: how can we deal with innappriote

userames like User:AMD64

00:51 < Alan___> Sue: I didn't find that

00:51 < mindspillage> I used to solicit people to add things to my

user page, after seeing other people do it.

00:51 <+sgardner> Tyw7: go ahead :-)

00:51 < geniice> sgardner I predate categories and no

00:51 < delphine> jorm: do graduate stay? Or does the lifecycle have

more stages?

00:51 < delphine> *graduates

00:51 < BarkingFish> *s/new users/users

00:51 <@StevenW> Why is AMD64 inappropriate?

00:51 < tommorris> jeremyb: may approach London coworking spaces and

ask them if they want WMUKers to turn up

00:51 < Theo10011> recognition i s universal delphine, and thats

coming from a different culture.

00:51 < mindspillage> (and many people did! I felt loved. Mostly

because most people played nice.)

00:51 < Austin> The Asian languages tend to have a more strictly

defined hierarchy, and the lack of communication leaves us all

ignorant of it until we actually deal with them in person and go

"Huh?"

00:51 < geniice> sgardner thing is category edits are cheap and semi automated

00:51 < jeremyb> tommorris: also, outreach to local groups like girls

in tech, etc. that might have a group of ppl that want to learn

00:51 < YairRand> barnstars are too "big", and too reserved for big

accomplishments.

00:51 < Alan___> Has anyone here participated in voice chats with

other wikipedians while editing?

00:52 < Tyw7|pingme> StevenW: its a name of an AMD product

00:52 < jorm> editors tend to follow what i call the "life insurance"

pattern.  the longer they live, the more likely they are to continue

living.

00:52 < Tyw7|pingme> and maybe promotional...

00:52 < delphine> Theo10011: it is, but the way to show it isn't.

00:52 < Theo10011> hmm

00:52 <@StevenW> Oh. Well, there's already a policy isn't there?

00:52 <+sgardner> geniice: It's interesting because I don't think new

people recognize when they're interacting with something that's

automated.

00:52 < Nihiltres> YairRand: yeah, I tend to just give out little

wiki-sunflowers as thanks

00:52 < jorm> thinking beyond 100 edits gets into different territory.

00:52 < Tyw7|pingme> I tried having him/her banned but got rejected

due to a previous case that says its ok

00:52 <+sgardner> I got an automated copyright infringement warning

just this past weekend.

00:52 < jorm> After that, the problems are primarily social.

00:52 <+sgardner> :-(

00:52 < BarkingFish> StevenW: It depends on the context it's used in.

If the person was only adding to articles about AMD products, it would

be hit as a promotional username

00:52 < delphine> sgardner: huhu

00:52 <@StevenW> Oh, on what Sgardner?

00:52 < James_F> Sue> Correctly?

00:52 < jorm> sue, i get those ALL THE TIME from bots on commons.

00:52 < Tyw7|pingme> BarkingFish: well s/he was

00:52 < Theo10011> heh Sgardner

00:52 < Nihiltres> sgardner: yeah, those are something I think are

really unfriendly

00:53 <+sgardner> jrom: really?

00:53 < jorm> ohyeah.

00:53 < James_F> Sue> 'Cos we all know you're out to undermine the

Wikimedia copyright agreement.

00:53 < Tyw7|pingme> but it was due to the previous case that my

request was rejected

00:53 < jfelipe> maybe they don't notice, look at the automated

welcome messages in Russian Wikipedia

00:53 < Alan___> So......... anyone using voice to chat with other editors?

00:53 < Pharos> yes

00:53 < Ziko_> Barnstars are too much, yes. I once put a photo with

flowers on the tp of my mentee, and he was so happy he copied it to

his user page.

00:53 < jfelipe> I think they're a good way to welcome a new user

00:53 < Ironholds> Alan___: yup

00:53 < jorm> and all i ever upload are screenshot mockups.

00:53 < Nihiltres> wall of text, bot, and scary deletion warning‚Ä¶ the TRIFECTA

00:53 < geniice> sgardner oh yes there are a couple of traps in the

english wikipedia upload form. I recently had to tell someone how to

get around them. Problem is I put them there in the first place

00:53 < Pharos> see Wikivoices/NotTheWikipediaWeekly

00:53 <+sgardner> It was awful. (The one I got.) It actually gave me a

bunch of rules about how I could respond: like, I could not take off

the warning, but I could dispute it on the talk page.

00:53 <+sgardner> I deleted it anyway.

00:53  * tommorris votes firmly in favour of reviving Wikivoices.

00:53 < James_F> Wow.

00:54 < Risker> Alan___, there used to be a few users who got together

on skype to discuss things, and there were some Wikivoices sessions

00:54 < jfelipe> Other times, people don't know how to react

00:54 < James_F> tommorris> What about Wikipedia Weekly?

00:54 < delphine> jorm: Commons admin is a thankless job. I did some

"copyvio stuff" a few days ago. I don't know templates any more, so I

wrote on the talk page, and realized the person was probably just on

commons by chance, so went to their wikipedia and told them there

about their pics being deleted

00:54 <@StevenW> jfelipe: yes, it would be great to be able to A/B

test the effectiveness of different welcome messages

00:54 <+sgardner> But I think if I had been less experienced (and I am

not THAT experienced) I would have been frightened away.

00:54 < tommorris> James_F: that too.

00:54 < mindspillage> Alan___: nope; I'm a text person. (I do like IRC a lot.)

00:54 < Alan___> I was considering setting up some kind of Ventrillo /

Teamspeak thing for Wikimedia Canada

00:54 < geniice> sgardner actualy we have bots that pic up template removal

00:54 < jfelipe> StevenW: That'd be very useful, indeed

00:54 < Alan___> I thought it would be neat to have a coffee house

type deal where people could show up and talk to eachother

00:54 < Nihiltres> Alan___: if that's what I think it is, that might be cool

00:54 < tommorris> Alan___: a Wikipedia teamspeak would be a good idea

00:54 < Tyw7|pingme> Alan___: for promotion?

00:54 <@StevenW> not sure what you mean geniice?

00:54 < Ironholds> tommorris: we have about a dozen of those

00:55 < tommorris> Ironholds: link?

00:55 < Tyw7|pingme> you mean going out on the streets promoting Wikipedia?

00:55 < geniice> StevenW which comment

00:55 < Ziko_> StevenW: Yes, test the effects

00:55 < Theo10011> We would only end up listening to the loudest person.

00:55 < jfelipe> 2 weeks ago, I had few students in our master, the

class went on to comment on their experience as new Wikipedia editors

00:55 < delphine> what's a teamspeak?

00:55 <+sgardner> (got lost, catching back up :-)

00:55 <@StevenW> "pic up template removal" geniice

00:55 < Risker> The audio meetings might be useful, Alan

00:55 < jfelipe> Some edited both in Spanish and Galician

00:55 < Alan___> Teamspeak is a server, that when you install the

client, you can log in and talk to people

00:55 < Theo10011> which might be a competition considering us. ;)

00:55 < delphine> k

00:55 < tommorris> delphine: a voice chat server, basically IRC for

voice - used mostly in online gaming

00:55 <@StevenW> ah gotcha Alan

00:55 < Alan___> So you log in with your username, it support

registered and unregistered visitors

00:55 < geniice> StevenW there are bots that notice deletion templates

being removed and react to that

00:55 < Theo10011> VoIP

00:55 <@StevenW> oh

00:55 < Alan___> It has rooms like IRC

00:55 <@StevenW> thx Geniice

00:56 < Nihiltres> I'd love some sort of IRC integration widget, personally

00:56  * Nihiltres is hugely visual

00:56 < Alan___> And the admins have moderator abilities

00:56 < jfelipe> and for instance, one of them had trouble to intepret

where the templates for "orphaned" or "no categories" came from

00:56 < tommorris> you could have a teamspeak but you only get to

speak if you've made five edits in the last hour. ;-)

00:56 <+sgardner> geniice: oh really!? So maybe I have not heard the

last of this bot :-)

00:56 < jfelipe> specially orphaned was somewhat obscure

00:56 < Keegan_> Nihiltres: You just wanted to say Widget

00:56 < Ironholds> tommorris: that would exclude most of the staff P

00:56 < Keegan_> I bet you even said it out loud :P

00:56 < Ironholds> *:P

00:56 < Tyw7|pingme> tommorris: bad idea...

00:56 < Ironholds> and the admins, for that matter

00:56 < Alan___> Well I was thinking more open than that morris

00:56 < tommorris> Ironholds: did I suggest that was not totally

intentional? ;-)

00:56 < jorm> I've been thinking about a WikiProject-level "group

chat" thing.  Kicking that idea around.  So if you're editing, say,

"Luke Skywalker," you could ask for help from WikiProject:StarWars,

and get IRC-like feedback.

00:56 < Tyw7|pingme> tommorris: because then people would make rubbish

edits just to team speak

00:56 < Alan___> I often skype with our director from Quebec

00:56 < Alan___> I drink beer, he drinks wine

00:56 < BarkingFish> and pretty much everyone not using twinkle or

huggle too, tommorris :)

00:56 < jorm> kind of like facebook's "group chat" thing.

00:56 < Nihiltres> Keegan_: widget gadget flickit ‚Ä¶ technologic :P

00:56 < Alan___> He works in french, me in english

00:56 < tommorris> anyway, skype/teamspeak stuff is getting kind of offtopic.

00:57 < Tyw7|pingme> but some wikiprojects are dead

00:57 < Alan___> and we help eachother out

00:57 < Alan___> Being on voice makes it easier to understand eachother

00:57 < ragesoss> jorm: I think, better than live chat, would be

something like an integrated statusnet system.

00:57 < jfelipe> jorm: yes, Wikiprojects could be also a good way to

improve things

00:57 < jfelipe> they can make interaction more social

00:57 < Alan___> Wikiprojects are key in my opinion

00:57 < Tyw7|pingme> first off how about an easier IRC system?

00:57 < ragesoss> so each WikiProject would be represented by a group.

00:57 < Nihiltres> Tyw7|pingme++

00:57 < Alan___> But they need support writing more comprehensive

article writing guides

00:57 < jfelipe> we know Wikipedia is not primarily a social network

00:57 < Tyw7|pingme> the catcha IMO is particularly off putting

00:57  * Risker has never joined a wikiproject, or seen one she'd want to join

00:57 < Ziko_> jfelipe: thanks for informing about what people think

about templates. indeed they often wonder where those messages come

from

00:58 < Keegan_> I left myself

00:58 < Keegan_> :(

00:58 < Theo10011> I love the IRC as it is, wouldn't want to part with them.

00:58 < YairRand> dead wikiprojects should always flow to a

wikiproject that includes the dead one's scope, if one exists

00:58 < geniice> oh yes the social wiki theory

00:58 < Tyw7|pingme> jfelipe: Wikipedia is already on Facebooks and Twitter

00:58 <+sgardner> jfelipe: it's not _primarily_ a social network, but

it does need to have social network aspects.....

00:58 < jfelipe> But I've heard more and more frequently, specially

from new editors, that it should support more social interaction

00:58 < Tyw7|pingme> Theo10011: I mean own client

00:58 < jorm> Wikipedia is not a social network.  It's an

encyclopedia.  The set of WIkipedia users who are its editor community

ARE a social network, however.

00:58 < mindspillage> ragesoss: oh, I like that.

00:58 < Tyw7|pingme> not depdent on webchat

00:58 < jorm> Not like Facebook, mind you.  But it is one.

00:58 < jfelipe> sgardner: you read my mind :)

00:58 <+sgardner> :-)