Thanks Benoit,
This sounds like a good step in the right direction. We'll need to try out
several of these approaches, but also improve our own documentation on
nl.wikipedia. My impression is that it is currently far too hard to add a
reference, to expect that this is done by most new contributors.
Do we know more about:
* How many new contributors know they should add a reference, e.g. when
writing a new article
* If they know that they should add a reference, how many know how to
recognize a good reference from a poor one
* How many new contributors, if they know that they should add a reference,
can figure out how to actually make this happen (assuming they know the url
already)
* Assuming that they can find the reference button, and know their URL, in
how many cases does the auto-convert feature work? (we could test this by
taking a random sample of reference URLs, and entering them in the
reference insertion tool)
These are not just technical problems - some of them are more about
awareness (we can focus for example a little less on copyright, and more on
other quality aspects) or good documentation (how to recognize a good
source?). I also suspect that these numbers might vary quite a bit across
communities/countries.
In my personal experience, it is hard to add references to articles even if
all the 'social' steps work smoothly (they often dont!). Maybe my sample is
biased, but it feels like I get much more often an error in nlwiki when I
try to convert a url to a citation, than in enwiki. Does anyone know if
this is indeed the case? Is anyone tracking statistics on this?
Best,
Lodewijk
On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 4:03?PM <bevellin@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Hello
>
> Some wikis have added the requirement to add citations at the edit summary
> step. But it is clearly too late in the process, as users just want to
> publish. Some users will add citations as a second step, but it might be
> too late, as the edit has a great chance of being reverted meanwhile.
>
> You might be interested in the Editing team's current project, Edit check <
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Edit_check>.
>
> This project aims to provide in-context help by checking on the edit. The
> first iteration is "Reference Check": if a user adds a paragraph with zero
> source, they are encouraged to add one. We are currently testing it at 22
> Wikipedias, to verify if the prompt to add citations is not blocking users.
>
> You can test it at your wiki using an URL parameter:
> 1. Edit any article in the main namespace using the VisualEditor.
> 2. Add &ecenable=1 to the URL in your browser. -- For example in Dutch, as
> Romaine started the thread:
> https://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zon&veaction=edit&ecenable=1
> 3. Reload the page with the new URL.
> 4. Create a new paragraph, that is at least 50 characters long without
> adding a citation
> 5. Press the Publish… Notice the prompt that appears
> 6. Test is completed, don't save your edit unless you know what you are
> doing.
>
> All edits are tagged, so that you can find them in Recent Changes or in
> your Watchlist. If a user selects "no" after the prompt, they have to
> select a reason why. That reason is tagged as well, easing experienced
> users' work on patrolling and improving these edits.
>
> We will soon add a message if the added citation is listed on
> MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist or MediaWiki:BlockedExternalDomains.json.
>
> As Edit Check only checks the first paragraph added, the next iteration
> will be to add multi-Reference checks. We are currently working on the
> design for multi-checks.
>
> Of course, Edit Check is not limited to adding citations. We can imagine
> other ways to close the tap. Your suggestions are welcomed, as are your
> questions.
>
> Thank you,
> --
> Benoît Evellin - Trizek_(WMF) (he/him)
> Community Relations Specialist
> Wikimedia Foundation
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/RWQIXLQEBNC62THG5J4TY7OCHCKRAPUF/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
This sounds like a good step in the right direction. We'll need to try out
several of these approaches, but also improve our own documentation on
nl.wikipedia. My impression is that it is currently far too hard to add a
reference, to expect that this is done by most new contributors.
Do we know more about:
* How many new contributors know they should add a reference, e.g. when
writing a new article
* If they know that they should add a reference, how many know how to
recognize a good reference from a poor one
* How many new contributors, if they know that they should add a reference,
can figure out how to actually make this happen (assuming they know the url
already)
* Assuming that they can find the reference button, and know their URL, in
how many cases does the auto-convert feature work? (we could test this by
taking a random sample of reference URLs, and entering them in the
reference insertion tool)
These are not just technical problems - some of them are more about
awareness (we can focus for example a little less on copyright, and more on
other quality aspects) or good documentation (how to recognize a good
source?). I also suspect that these numbers might vary quite a bit across
communities/countries.
In my personal experience, it is hard to add references to articles even if
all the 'social' steps work smoothly (they often dont!). Maybe my sample is
biased, but it feels like I get much more often an error in nlwiki when I
try to convert a url to a citation, than in enwiki. Does anyone know if
this is indeed the case? Is anyone tracking statistics on this?
Best,
Lodewijk
On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 4:03?PM <bevellin@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Hello
>
> Some wikis have added the requirement to add citations at the edit summary
> step. But it is clearly too late in the process, as users just want to
> publish. Some users will add citations as a second step, but it might be
> too late, as the edit has a great chance of being reverted meanwhile.
>
> You might be interested in the Editing team's current project, Edit check <
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Edit_check>.
>
> This project aims to provide in-context help by checking on the edit. The
> first iteration is "Reference Check": if a user adds a paragraph with zero
> source, they are encouraged to add one. We are currently testing it at 22
> Wikipedias, to verify if the prompt to add citations is not blocking users.
>
> You can test it at your wiki using an URL parameter:
> 1. Edit any article in the main namespace using the VisualEditor.
> 2. Add &ecenable=1 to the URL in your browser. -- For example in Dutch, as
> Romaine started the thread:
> https://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zon&veaction=edit&ecenable=1
> 3. Reload the page with the new URL.
> 4. Create a new paragraph, that is at least 50 characters long without
> adding a citation
> 5. Press the Publish… Notice the prompt that appears
> 6. Test is completed, don't save your edit unless you know what you are
> doing.
>
> All edits are tagged, so that you can find them in Recent Changes or in
> your Watchlist. If a user selects "no" after the prompt, they have to
> select a reason why. That reason is tagged as well, easing experienced
> users' work on patrolling and improving these edits.
>
> We will soon add a message if the added citation is listed on
> MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist or MediaWiki:BlockedExternalDomains.json.
>
> As Edit Check only checks the first paragraph added, the next iteration
> will be to add multi-Reference checks. We are currently working on the
> design for multi-checks.
>
> Of course, Edit Check is not limited to adding citations. We can imagine
> other ways to close the tap. Your suggestions are welcomed, as are your
> questions.
>
> Thank you,
> --
> Benoît Evellin - Trizek_(WMF) (he/him)
> Community Relations Specialist
> Wikimedia Foundation
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/RWQIXLQEBNC62THG5J4TY7OCHCKRAPUF/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org