Grants talk:Project/Rapid/Matthewvetter/Reckoning with Wikipedia

Comments from I JethroBT (WMF)

Hello Matthewvetter and ZachMcDowell, and thanks for this proposal aiming to support better understanding of English Wikipedia policies and the broader Wikimedia movement. We will be funding the proposal, and I do have a few questions I'd like your feedback on. Here are my questions and comments:

• The general audience for this proposal are students, teachers, and researchers in cultural studies across two sessions. What misconceptions about English Wikipedia policies / the movement in general are most important to address in this audience?
• What information do you plan to assess in your participants? Understanding that your session time is limited, is it practical/possible to perform this assessment this during the sessions as opposed to after to support better participation?
• While the immediate goals of the proposal here are focused on developing better awareness and understanding about English Wikipedia, a longer term one is to support some fundamental needs to help people become advocates and active participants in the movement. Are there any aspects of these sessions (such as a call to action) that will help provide interested conference participants to engage in the movement in this way?

Thanks again for the proposal, and hope the presentations go well! With thanks, I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 18:38, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Responses from Grantee

Hello I JethroBT (WMF). Thank you so much both the funding approval, and for these great questions, which have helped us better plan and shape the events. See responses below in bold/italic, and please don't hesitate to follow up with any additional questions or concerns. Matthewvetter (talk) 13:14, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

• The general audience for this proposal are students, teachers, and researchers in cultural studies across two sessions. What misconceptions about English Wikipedia policies / the movement in general are most important to address in this audience?

In our shared experience, academics in the humanities and social sciences typically have misconceptions about or are even completely unaware of the three core content policies: Neutral Point of View, No Original Content, and Verifiability, as well as norms that emerge from these. For example, we have noticed how academics often believe that Verifiability means that secondary sources used in an article must be published online, or that fail to understand how No Original Content often conflicts with the academic genres (e.g. research article) they are more accustomed to writing in. While we plan to ask open-ended questions related to participants' understanding, past experiences, and misconceptions at the beginning of Session 1, we will also guide the conversation in some of these initial directions. We have also found that many academics may have had some initial experience in Wikipedia (for instance, a revert of a well-intentioned edit) that has discouraged them from continuing to engage because they may have misinterpreted the rationale for the revert. So another important issue to address for this audience would be understanding/reading edit histories to interpret how experienced editors enact core content policy through reverts.

• What information do you plan to assess in your participants? Understanding that your session time is limited, is it practical/possible to perform this assessment this during the sessions as opposed to after to support better participation?

Yes, our initial questionnaire for Session 1 will include a broad/open assessment to gather information about participants' experience, (mis)understanding, and (mis)conceptions about Wikipedia. This initial questionnaire will then be the basis for the following discussion. We will keep a record of this information as well as any responses to the follow-up form (which, as you have correctly anticipated, may pose an issue in terms of participation/engagement).

• While the immediate goals of the proposal here are focused on developing better awareness and understanding about English Wikipedia, a longer term one is to support some fundamental needs to help people become advocates and active participants in the movement. Are there any aspects of these sessions (such as a call to action) that will help provide interested conference participants to engage in the movement in this way?

Yes, in both sessions we will conclude by sharing a call to action for participants to get involved in the movement by describing our own positive experiences in initiatives such as Wiki Education (which we both have been involved with for about a decade), as well as WikiProject Writing (which Matt is very involved in), and other affiliate projects - e.g. AfroCrowd & Whose Knowledge?.