Wikipedia talk:How to run an edit-a-thon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Please be bold[edit]

I've created this how-to guide with my work account instead of my personal one since I did this as part of my followup work after Wikipedia:Meetup/San Francisco WikiWomen's Edit-a-Thon, but this is not something the Foundation owns at all. Lots of community members have experience with edit-a-thons, so please hack away. :) Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 21:06, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Input from a UK perspective[edit]

Please see [1] for a UK perspective based on the British Library events. We really need to figure out a single place that this information can be located. Perhaps Meta would be the best place, given its nominal role of being the place where all Wikimedia projects come together to discuss anything cross-wiki? Mike Peel (talk) 22:40, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I feel pretty resistant to saying we need a one-size-fits-all documentation page, especially on a place no one reads like Meta or Outreach wikis. Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 22:45, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Also, thanks for the link to the libraries guide, that's great stuff! Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 22:47, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
I'm just tired of pointing out the same link to information again and again. ;-) And I keep wishing that there was a single place for cross-project discussions to take place. I agree that a 'one-size-fits-all documentation page' isn't the solution - but a one-stop page that links to a variety of useful perspectives would be ... erm ... useful. Mike Peel (talk) 23:18, 20 March 2012 (UTC) P.S. some people (e.g. me) do read meta... ;-)
This is yet another case where cross-wiki transclusion would solve all our woes. Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 23:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Or having a culture that is used to, and encouraged to, gather on both on a local scale, and a cross-project scale, in just 2 distinct places - rather than having the latter fragmented across multiple wikis and mailing lists. </rant> Mike Peel (talk) 23:44, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Hear hear! Ijon (talk) 01:33, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

A key reason for the largest British Library event working well was having it well structured with a bit of up front introductions (by me) at the beginning which encouraged everyone to, very briefly, explain their background and expectations. This was a 25 people event, a small event might easily work well in a more un-conference like fashion, though not everyone is comfortable in the absence of an agenda. Identifying a leader for the event who is experienced, comfortable with keeping the event on time and injecting a bit of humour to the process is probably worth highlighting in a how-to. Cheers -- (talk) 22:54, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that Fae. If anyone's interested, we started an event-specific notes page at Wikipedia:Meetup/San Francisco WikiWomen's Edit-a-Thon/Reflections. Cheers, Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 22:57, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
I still remember well the unexpected situation that we encountered at the first British Library editathon - we'd planned for 50:50 wikimedia:library curator attendees over the course of a 2-day event (Fri-Sat) that could support each other with their different skill sets, but it turned out that on the Friday we had 20-odd curators, and only 3 Wikimedians present - and then on the Saturday, the ratio was reversed as we had only a couple of curators but lots of Wikimedians. Fortunately, Fæ (who was an unknown Wikipedian to me at the time) saved the (fri)day. Lesson learned: plan for all eventualities, and have schedules planned for the three possible situations of curators-only, wikimedians-only and mixed-curators-and-wikimedians. Mike Peel (talk) 23:44, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Discussing the term edit-a-thon[edit]

hey, I just came across edit-a-thon, an event or timeframe dedicated to develop specific WP articles. I always use the term 'Wikisprint' for this type of event after I think these two terms overlap in their meaning or even mean the same. Should not we merge them? Bujatt (talk) 08:19, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Editathon - should it be a category?[edit]

I see a lot of editathons have come out of the Wikipedia Loves Libraries campaign. But I also see editathons held at other kinds of institutions (not all of which qualify for a meetup). Should there be a new category for editathons? -- kosboot (talk) 19:41, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

I think thats a great idea! Zell Faze (talk) 19:56, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
Be bold, my friend. Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 22:07, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

getting articles from draft into the main space[edit]

At an edit-a-thon in Australia this week, we had 100+ mostly new contributers, some at physical meetups, others online. They initially created their articles in sandbox and as drafts, but at the end of the day, we really wanted to get the articles into main space (as past experience with edit training has shown a lot of people don't return to editing after the event is over and the work would be lost if we didn't immediately get it into main space). However, the new contributors could not do a "move", so we had to resort to copy-and-paste. A lot of the online participants needed someone else to do it for them. The result was the edit histories were lost and various people sent unpleasant messages to me and others involved because of it. There was nothing on this page that mentioned this issue, so I was unprepared for it. Can it be updated to explain how to deal with this problem? It's a waste if the event ends with all the articles still sitting in draft. I am told if we had had an administrator involved in the event they could have solved the problem in some way, but I am sketchy on the details. But presumably we have to have solutions that work for events that don't have an administrator involved. Kerry (talk) 21:42, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm not an admin, but I'd be willing to review some articles if the problem ever crops up again. Its not a great solution, but I'd be happy to help however I can. Zell Faze (talk) 21:22, 16 August 2014 (UTC)