User:MichelleBir./reflection

Reflecting on my Wikipedia Experience

I take my phone out every day to use the Transit app, but I never thought it would be the subject of my Wikipedia article. When I began editing and updating the Transit app article, it was a small stub. The original article page was created in 2017, and only included a brief description of what the app was. I was a bit nervous about how the Wikipedia community would feel about me. The final version of the article, as far as my edits go, includes an introduction to describe the app as well as the following categories: Features—which includes information on back-end data and criticisms of the app—as well as Supported Regions, Partners—which includes endorsers—and Investors. I am pleased with the state of my article and I found that, as a newcomer, I was very welcomed into the community. I was given the assumption of good faith as a user; I believe that contributing to a Wikipedia article was a constructive way for me to engage first-hand with a selection of concepts from my Online Communities course.

When completing any sort of task, it is important to examine the motivations of that task. Robert Kraut and Paul Resnick describe that there are both intrinsic (internal) and extrinsic (external) motivational factors that lead to contributions or committal to an online community. Due to the fact that my adding to a Wikipedia article was an assignment for a class, innately, my motivation to contribute was extrinsic. I was working towards an end goal with the reward being a grade. Due to the external motivation to be an active member of the Wikipedia community, I was able to engage with the community and begin to understand the interworking of this specific online community as a user, supplementing our course readings and textbook. Part of this assignment was to interact with Wikipedians. With this task, I wanted to make sure I was able to interact with members of the community as well as receive feedback on my article. I started by reaching out to users who were listed as editors of the article, Daylen and Grayfell. Daylen responded to me quickly, and opened his feedback by welcoming me to Wikipedia. He then left me suggested changes to make to the article, such as removing some of my external links and ensuring that my introduction included only the most important information about the app. He also called attention to a Bloomberg citation that would not render properly, which I was able to fix. Next, I interacted with the user Grayfell who also gave me very useful feedback. He opened with the disclaimer that his original edits to the page were to remove spam. However, he still went on to critique the article, reminding me to maintain a formal tone, and referred me to the Wikipedia teahouse if I was in need of additional edits. Grayfell also added categories and removed the word "Developers" from my original "Investors and Developers" heading in order to improve the clarity of the information in the section. I also interacted with Shalor, who cautioned me to make sure my tone was neutral much like Grayfell did.

Just like it is difficult to start at a new school or join a new club, being a newcomer in the Wikipedia community was difficult because I was so far removed from the norms and expectations of this community I had never been in before. I categorized myself as a “WikiChild”. I was actively contributing to an article and communicating with more established members of the Wikipedia community. As a newcomer to the site, I felt welcomed. However, I believe this was mainly because when I set up my profile it was immediately flagged as a student. I also had my professor and seasoned user and educator, Shalor, to ease me into the community and advise me on how to conduct myself. As demonstrated in Kraut and Resnick's chapter titled "The Challenges of Dealing with Newcomers", an important element of engaging newcomers to a community is through socialization, "teaching them how to behave in ways appropriate to the group", and with the help of Professor Reagle and Shalor, socialization was easier than if I had gone in on my own. In addition to having these built-in resources, Daylen and Grayfell were also very helpful and did not make me feel like a nuisance. Rather, they directed me to pages within Wikipedia (such as the teahouse) where I could find additional information on how to make my article the best it could be in the eyes of the Wikipedia community. The only recommendation I would make to Wikipedia here would be to condense the information available for those who are not well-versed in navigating Wikipedia. A one-page description of where to find specific tips and tricks solely for newcomers could be beneficial and less overwhelming for new users such as myself.

Although I was directed to pages where I could get more information or learn about the community's norms, the users I interacted with did not make me feel useless or unhelpful. They assumed good faith and guided me without having a negative connotation towards my lack of knowledge due to my newcomer status. I find that this type of direction to information is more productive than other methods of redirection such as the slightly abrasive "Read the Fucking Manual" approach as mentioned in Reagle's "The Obligation to Know: From FAQ to Feminism 101". Online communities utilize tools such as manuals and informative pages, as well as Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) pages in order to control newcomer harm or disruption. Kraut and Resnick also note that sandboxes are another way to "protect a community from misbehaving participants." In the sandbox, new users can create pages and write articles without altering content on Wikipedia. This is an active way Wikipedia is able to minimize incomplete or lackluster content from making its way into the main space.

Even if it may not seem like it as an outsider, I quickly learned that Wikipedia uses moderation strategies in order to keep the community performing at its best. As defined in James Grimmelmann's article, "The Virtues of Moderation", moderation can be defined as, "the governance mechanisms that structure participation in a community to facilitate cooperation and prevent abuse". The first example of moderation I encountered on Wikipedia is Grayfell's comment on the Transit app article,

"...my edits were to remove some spam added about a year ago. Spam and promotional editing is an ongoing problem, especially with business and technology articles. Part of this is undisclosed paid editing (which is prohibited by Wikipedia, but is difficult to enforce), and there are other reasons, as well".

Moderation is a process that many Wikipedians likely take pride in; they monitor the articles on the website in order to ensure that community guidelines are being respected and followed. Two forms of moderation that are innately integrated into the structure of Wikipedia are editing, the alteration of content ranging from correcting typos to changing the "very essence" of a post, and deletion, the removal of content. I am aware that some of my classmates did have issues surrounding moderation with their own articles, specifically, their content was removed on account of conflicts of interest. Even though this did not happen to me, it was interesting to see that content of certain articles was automatically given more attention and put under higher scrutiny than others. While Wikipedia allows all users to contribute and edit content, more seasoned users take responsibility to use methods of moderation to ensure that contributions are productive.

This experience was very new to me, and although I was in uncharted territory, I am glad I was able experience working in an online community and felt like I added to an article in a productive way. An issue I ran into while adding to my article was remaining in a neutral tone. I thought I was being neutral but it seemed that even throughout my rounds of edits, I could not find a way to make my phrasing more straightforward. This is something I believe would only come to me with more experience writing and editing on Wikipedia. I found tangible examples of both moderation and treatment of newcomers while being on Wikipedia; I felt valued by those who thanked me for my edits and took the time to assist me in bettering my content. Although my time on Wikipedia has come to an end, my article is living in the main space and may continue to grow or change if another Wikipedian feels compelled to contribute. -MichelleBir. (talk) 17:18, 22 November 2019 (UTC)