Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 68.107.137.178 (talk) at 03:39, 7 May 2013 (→Another reason editors leave). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconEditor Retention
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Editor Retention, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of efforts to improve editor retention on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Editor RetentionWikipedia:WikiProject Editor RetentionTemplate:WikiProject Editor RetentionEditor Retention articles

This WikiProject was featured on the WikiProject report in an article by User:Mabeenot at the Signpost on 22 April 2013

And another valuable administrator has bit the dust

Dreadstar (talk · contribs · former admin: blocks · protections · deletions · rights · meta · local rights), a valuable and considerate administrator, has decided to leave Wikipedia during this BASC discussion on Will Beback. He blocked himself indefinitely and asked MBisanz to remove his administrative tools. Very sad news... Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:13, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dreadstar has returned. No parade was held. ```Buster Seven Talk 13:28, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
no parade, but a happy move on our sad list (how much I prefer to mve them back!), and a triumphant picture on top of my user ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:31, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also on a irrelevant note, AutomaticStrikeout has left the project. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 06:30, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not good news. I've contact them and just offered an ear and a thanks. When someone is upset, I don't think the answer is trying to talk them into coming back. That isn't always the best option anyway and it presumes you know what is best for them. I think the best we can do is simply give them a genuine "thank you" for all the good things they have done, if you are willing and actually know them, offer to listen and let them know you don't take their efforts for granted. You can't undo the hurt they feel, you can't take away the frustration. If you knew them and appreciate the hard work they did, you can say thank you. Then hope they come back. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 20:27, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AAPT

Since I don't believe I have advertised these here in the past, I will do so now. "Arbs are people too" and "Admins are people too" are two essay/petitions that I wrote a while back in support of our oft–maligned Arbs and Admins. I believe that these essays would fall under the scope of editor retention, so I thought I would call them to your attention here. Regards, AutomaticStrikeout (T • C • Sign AAPT) 15:46, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear friends,

You have no idea of how happy and proud I am with what you and many others have done with the Editor of the Week program. The feedback I've seen from the people who have received it is inspiring. I'm hoping to see more of us get involved with the program. Honestly, I think it is the best thing we have done as a group. Buster, Gerda, Isaacl, AutomaticStrikeout, Gtwfan52, TheOriginalSoni, Epipelagic, Khazar2, Go Phightins!, and I know I'm missing several names so forgive me, but all of you should be very proud of what you have helped create here. I simply can't overstate how amazed and happy I am. The entire Project should be proud of the good work turning a simple idea into a solid, functioning reward system that surpases my original dreams. Too bad we don't live near each other, I would be honored to buy each and every one of you a pint, or just pick up the tab for the whole night. We aren't done yet, but it is certainly a solid foundation. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 00:04, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • BTW, if you don't want to get overly involved, you can still make a difference by simply going to the editor who was rewarded each weeks and simply leaving a kind note of thanks and gratitude. That alone makes a huge difference and lets them know that many of us really do notice and care. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 00:09, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh, and Amadscientist should definitely be on the list of those to thank, for both his graphics ability in creating our official logo, and obviously his hard work and determination in promoting the cause of editor retention overall. I can't believe I've left him out. I will be accepting trouts now for the oversight. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 18:33, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Notifications

New meta feature that we should all become familiar with. I haven't read up on it yet, it was just announced at WP:AN. Designed to replace watchlist. Looks like of Facebook-esque, but at first glance, sounds like a good idea. I would expect a lot of questions. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 12:57, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ok, I officially love the new notifications system. Not everyone does, however. Writ Keeper made a script, User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/orangeBar.js which will work as a orange bar replacement for those that just have to have the orange bar. I expect a few will complain, we all hate change and such, so this is the solution until they get used to the new system. There is a bug that IPs can't see the orange bar or any notifications, but they are working on the bug. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 17:46, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The 16th EotW

User:FeydHuxtable Congratulations can be offered at his talk page. New Nominations are the life blood of the EotW project. Is there an editor that stands out in a way deserving of positive attention? Any one you edit alongside that deserves some special acknowledgement? Dont hesitate to Nominate. You will be happy that you did! ```Buster Seven Talk 22:25, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Adios

Just so everyone knows, I will be taking a temporary Wikibreak for at least 5-7 days to let off some steam and get myself reenergized. Some of the stress has got to me, so I think it's best if I should take a couple of days off. I also have final exams coming up as well. I will only be back to work on certain articles. Till then, adios. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:09, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Final exams are much more important than anything that might happen here, so concentrate on them. They can change your life, but nothing here will. Malleus Fatuorum 20:15, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
See ya when you get back. I was off for about two weeks myself for family issues.--Amadscientist (talk) 20:32, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, everyone. Also, just to clarify, some of the stress stems from the recent disputes that I have been involved in as well as my frustration over Wikipedia's inability to deal with a couple of persistently disruptive users (i.e. those with a bullying or battleground mentality in general or those who seem to be oblivious to their own uncivil behaviors), combined with the realization of my unintended immaturity in some of my approaches to dealing with these users (including my unintentional feeding of the Streisand effect), a couple of users' comments towards me were in a negative light and/or condescending (I have exceptionally low tolerance for these comments which were uncalled for, and one of these users has already apologized to me after I apologized to him). I have been recently subjected to very serious personal abuse and constant uncivil behavior by these users, but I have mostly moved on from that. Such things like these are considered a disgrace to the community and to some editors with an excellent contribution record, including myself. Also, I fear that if I engage a disruptive user while trying to avoid them, I may push the wrong buttons accidentally. These reasons are a couple of the factors in my Wikibreak, and are also why I refuse to get involved in dealing with other difficult users until the time is right because it causes me undue stress. In the past, while I have almost always been civil, I may have caused issues with other users (disruptive or not) in anyway or might have been uncivil in any way towards anyone and I do not appreciate it when people are incivil or condescending towards me, so if I have done that or anything wrong, I am terribly sorry and I really didn't mean for some things to happen... Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 15:27, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • We all cross the line from time to time. I did with History2007s failed RfA and likely other times. Another time, Ent once told me I was stressed and needed to take a break, so I did. We are all human, we care, so we get caught up in events sometimes. Having the ability to see and understand our limits is what prevents us from repeating the same mistake too many times, and keeps us out of trouble. Taking a break is a good idea, we all need to from time to time, none of us are exempt. Don't beat yourself up over mistakes, just learn from them, get a break, come back and continue to do good things. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 15:38, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks, Dennis. I have been feeling a little isolated and betrayed by some of the Wikipedia community after that resentful heckling and negativity by some long-term abusive users over the past couple of months, which I find to be off-putting from the beginning (fortunately, part of that has already been dealt with and Ched has apologized to me after realizing he said some things in a negative light, which I am grateful for since I apologized to him in the first place if I caused any issues with other users and was uncivil in any way, as I am a level-headed person by nature). I think it's best to avoid contentious confrontations like these on Wikipedia, but life in general. That same thing happened to DarthBotto, a user who has kept himself busy with other things due to his dealings with a long-term abusive user. Also, before I go, I would like to make it clear to everyone that I have a very strict policy advising against all personal attacks and have an exceptionally low tolerance for uncalled for comments which I find to be harassing, haranguing, accusatory, inflammatory, incivil, heckling, insulting, condescending, disrespectful, abusive, venomous, yelling, annoying, embarassing, temperamental, rude or threatening, or those that are full of vulgarity. All of these can create a power imbalance in communication and are considered detrimental to the discussion. If these happen, I will remove and disregard them on sight if they are posted on my talk page. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 15:52, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Honestly, I've felt a weight on me as well, which is why I've chosen to bury myself deep into article content, finishing up a rather large project and taking it to GA, only my second and the only one where I was mainly alone on the content. It helps that it isn't a controversial topic. Sometimes, the best thing to do is ignore everyone and just find something fun to research and create. That is what we are here for anyway. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 18:07, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yeah. I feel mostly the same way as you, lad. I don't know why Fladrif and other users have gone so far just to demoralize me and be punished for my shortcomings, but I can't trust users like these no longer, as well as those who attempt to bludgeon me with rhetorics or venomous falsehoods. Dealing with a couple of abusive users has partially caused me undue stress on my part (and I admit that I have done that unintentionally) and have emphasized the fact that, in the immortal words of DarthBotto, "some things are just not worth the risk". I get a little upset whenever someone posts questionable aspects on my behavior (i.e. attempting to discredit me). If a user involved in a dispute for example, the best bet is to come back to it at a later time (whether it's a long time or a short time) and focus on content. Also, if a user has made negative observations about me in the past, it's always best to apologize if they realize those mistakes (as is the case here, where Ched apologized if he offended me personally (I felt that I was offended by some of his comments pertaining to some issues that need to be dealt with) and praised me for my efforts in improving Wikipedia and will not "hold grudges" and he said "it's all good.") I never intend to personally attack anyone nor do I want to risk feeding the Streisand effect or get blocked for unintended personal attacks. However, I have occasionally lost my temper and stepped on some toes from time to time. In any case, though, I am not at all humiliated. Nor am I a liar. The best strategy whenever you are involved in a dispute: Keep Calm and Carry On. Unfortunately, in other related news, Gwickwire has retired over a major incident at ANI. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:17, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lord Jones, if I may be so bold as to make a suggestion. When you return from your R&R would you consider starting a page, somewhere, maybe in a sandbox or something, where we could collect the stated reasons that editors give for retiring. I suggest this to you because you seem to have an interest and awareness of retiring editors. We are Editor Retention and we are searching for ways that we can be a part of the solution to the problem. I think some of our answers as to our future direction lie in the soliloquies that frustrated editors "purge to anyone listening" as to what is wrong and why they can't take it anymore. As they are walking out the WP Door, they want us to know whats wrong and that we need to fix it. I would be more than happy to assist and should this sub-project get legs, I'm sure other editors will get involved. Thank You. ```Buster Seven Talk 13:47, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Community portal

We now have a section at the community portal. If there are suggestions on how to improve this, please let me know.--Amadscientist (talk) 21:31, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic! One edit possibility. In the hearder for editor retention it states Editor of the week (lower case w). Cna someone change it to Upper case W? ```Buster Seven Talk
 Done AutomaticStrikeout (T • C • Sign AAPT) 18:46, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
👍 Like. For the life of me...I couldn't find it.--Amadscientist (talk) 19:20, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Snuggle could use an notice of its own. Aaron has been making progress and intends to release an updated version today. More people to try out the feature and give their feedback would be very good. See snuggle's current notice on its pages for how the notice could be.
Also a few minor suggested tweaks-
  • Change font of "PROJECT EDITOR RETENTION COLLABORATION", and colour to Blue.
  • EotW needs to be inside that notice, and with the EotW logo.
TheOriginalSoni (talk) 21:39, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sign Post

I didn't see this mentioned so I thought I would say how great the Sign post article was...aside from my typos and spelling. LOL! --Amadscientist (talk) 04:38, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another case study

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Block of Blackcountrygirl. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:21, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • On the other hand it actually looks, ironically, like they may have already left before being blocked anyway, so I'm not sure what the point of blocking was even if there was a strong case that they were spamming. I would note as well that this name was reported at WP:UAA yesterday and that report was declined. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:56, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Editing the project or projct page

"Document ways in which all editors can achieve these goals and organize them within the projct subpages."

Can someone correct the spelling error on the Project Page, since that is apparently protected from being corrected? -68.107.137.178 (talk) 08:48, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Delaywaves

...is one of the thousands of hard-working but un-acknowledged Wikipedia editors. WER has just awarded him this week EotW Award. Drop by his talk page to offer your congratulations and consider who you might nominate. Dont hesitate to Nominate. You will be happy that you did! ```Buster Seven Talk 21:31, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another reason editors leave

I don't even know how to begin to argue that Hawaii is not on the North American Plate. It's not. It never was. Yet the editors who have created the articles on Geology of North America and Geology of the United States, disorganized and factually inaccurate messes, have started these articles from this strange basis, with statements that regional geology is arbitrarily defined (an unsupported statement based on a translation of the German or Dutch article on regional geology, and it may have a slightly different meaning in those countries), to support including information that is just thrown into the articles, contradicts other information and has no supporting reason for inclusion. It's far from citable. It's wrong.

Why should an article with misinformation be kept on Wikipedia? Why should it be nominated for the main page?

Editors leave because of Wikipedia's disdain for expertise or even basic knowledge. Wikipedia needs expertise in tectonics and structural geology articles, because many of the articles are wrong, and the misinformation is being widely communicated in cyberspace. But, experts don't stand a chance, because Wikipedia appears to be more about social networking than about creating an encyclopedia, and experts often maintain expertise by working at full time jobs. I don't have the patience to edit these articles, to fight their owners to get the articles to a point where they are not wrong. But, someone needs to remove these articles from Wikipedia and stop spreading this misinformation.

Please discuss articles on their talk pages, please don't discuss me, as I have given up, and, you know, Randy in Boise is out to get me, but I think that Wikipedia seriously needs to find a way to get expertise in tough technical subjects or a way of removing bad articles quickly rather than letting them be mirrored. -64.134.230.142 (talk) 00:53, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is why we encourage experienced editors to get involved with dispute resolution and content disputes, to help mediate them. As for Randy, I understand your frustration and I can't say you are wrong about a few (but not most) editors. I try to not let it come across in how I communicate, but seldom a day passes that I don't want to reach through the monitor and choke the stuffing out of someone who desperately needs it. Why I don't do this is the same reason I keep coming back day after day: The Reader. So I come back, I use the proper dispute resolution channels, and try to keep a cool head. Years from now when I'm dead and gone, my original prose will likely have been changed over and over, but at least I gave the reader something worthwhile while I was here. Or at least I tried. I understand being frustrated, and needing to vent sometimes, but don't let it get you down too low. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:49, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • To me, dispute resolution is part of the problem. It takes so much time and effort to correct one piece of nonsense. Why are these articles being written by editors who can't identify something as big as the Pacific Plate and distinguish it from the North American Plate? Because Wikipedia is not primarily about writing the articles, or so it seems to me. Most editors on Wikipedia are fine. But the culture favors young First World males who are here for social networking first. Once they get it into their heads that they are competent to write and then own a highly technical article, there is nothing that will allow someone with the least bit of knowledge to be able to get in there and correct the mess. I'm already frustrated because I am an obvious outsider to the entire process; I don't stand a chance at dispute resolution processes, designed by and designed to favor the same editors who are creating the problem to begin with. I work 60 hours a week; how am I supposed to correct a single sentence of factually incorrect information if it requires me to spend weeks resolving the dispute that Hawaii is in the Pacific Ocean, not attached to San Francisco? Doesn't anyone ever say, look, let's get the information right, and if it's wrong, just remove it from the encyclopedia rather than requiring editors to spend weeks correcting nonsense? Wikipedia has a large anti-pseudoscience brigade, but none of the pseudoscience being removed can match the bad science being sent out on the web. -64.134.230.142 (talk) 02:29, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, let's face it, dispute resolution will not just favor the standard First World young male social networking editor, it will also lock in his version of the article, and that is what will be on the web, turning up in Google searches, while dispute resolution works slowly to the conclusion that what the article says does not matter, even if it is unsourced (because no reliable sources make Hawaii part of the Sierra Nevada). -64.134.230.142 (talk) 02:32, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

      • If I had all the answers, we wouldn't need WP:WER. Again, I can't argue against your basic premise here, resolution is a long process. I have been known to drop notes at the talk page at the Project that covers the article, ie: WP:WikiProject Geology, or I will look at the article history and find a recent editor that seems to have a good head on their shoulders and leave a note on their talk page. And you probably don't want to hear this, but I have to mention it because it is true: Fair or not, you do get more respect with a registered account. It isn't my doing, it is just human nature. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 02:35, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • The projects are often good sources for article help, but the most active members are the current owners of the problem articles, and they don't seem to have the necessary background to discuss the problems with, in addition to being more interested in discussing me than correcting the problems (easy to fall into that with the dominance of the social over encyclopedia aspect of Wikipedia). I don't want "respect," I want my edits to contribute accurately to what Wikipedia puts out there, you know, it's about the encyclopedia, not me, and I see the extensive social networking that interferes with editing, and I can't get excited about gaining that type of respect. -03:39, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Editor_Retention&oldid=553892174"