User:Jretrum/wikipediareflection

Introduction

Wikipedia and I have always had a one-sided relationship, and I'll be the first to admit...I've been the selfish one. I have used Wikipedia for countless papers throughout my school years, and yet, never imagined becoming a Wikipedian and actually giving back to the site. I always knew that Wikipedia labeled itself the "free encyclopedia" and one that virtually anyone can edit. (As it states in its About Page, "anyone with Internet access can write and make changes to Wikipedia articles, except in limited cases where editing is restricted to prevent disruption or vandalism). However, I felt that the true editors were a part of a culture that I didn't belong to, and never would. Through the forced-contribution and, in essence, adaptation of Wikipedia norms and regulations in this Online Communities Course, I realized that becoming a "Wikipedian" is easier than I imagined. In my reflection, I will draw upon Kraut and Resnick's Building Successful Online Communities, as well as additional related class readings, to discuss the ways in which the Wikipedia community transformed me into a "Wikipedian." I will begin with my initial encounters on Wikipedia as a "newcomer" and then discuss how I related moving my article to the main space to a somewhat "severe" initiation process that ultimately made me more committed to the community and its cause.

Welcoming the "Newbie": My Initiation Process on Wikipedia

Before contributing to Wikipedia, my HTML coding experience had been limited to a few very basic training days at my first co-op. HTML coding aside, I had little knowledge about the ways in which someone "edits" a page and how it is regulated by the community; a website that I now know is strictly grounded in its five pillars of normative guidelines. Let's face it, I was a "Noob". As a "noob" that had heard rumors about the "elitist" culture on Wikipedia, and the dauntingly low percentages of women editors, I was afraid that I would be shunned upon entering the community and told to essentially RTFM or get out. However, I quickly learned that Wikipedia has several significant design features that help newcomers acclimate to the culture, and eventually effectively contribute to the site.

The first thing we as members of the Online Communities Course were prompted to do was undergo Wikipedia's training tutorial. Through the mere forty-five minutes I spent completing the four modules of the tutorial, I was able to learn a great deal about the five pillars that Wikipedia structures itself around, as well as some simple (and advanced) editing tips. Kraut and Resnick might call the tutorial that we were required to complete a "collective socialization tactic". A "collective socialization tactic" is defined as "newcomers that go through a common set of experiences designed to produce standardized responses to situations." The tutorial acted as a collective process that each student in the course had to take, but one that I would recommend to all Wikipedia newcomers; it essentially welcomed me to the community by providing a strong foundation about Wikipedia's norms and its editing process. In this sense, the quick tutorial made me much more confident and willing to contribute to the site. This is consistent with Kraut and Resnick's Design Claim 22, which states "By using formal, sequential, and collective socialization tactics, new members are likely to become more committed to the community, learn how to behave in it, and contribute more."

In addition to Wikipedia's training tutorial, I was encouraged to contribute to the site through the use of the "sandbox." According to Kraut and Resnick's Design Claim 24, "Sandboxes both speed up the learning process for newcomers and reduce the harm to the community that newcomers might otherwise cause." The tutorial provided ample opportunities to "test" editing techniques in the sandbox space, and I willingly did so knowing that my edits would not be public in any way. In addition, when I began actually creating my article on the Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative, I found comfort in the fact that I did not have to move my article over to the "main space" until I felt it was ready. The tutorial and the sandbox were two design features that not only eliminated much of my trepidation about adding to Wikipedia, but also helped to welcome me to the community. However, I did not feel truly "recognized" by fellow Wikipedians until I received my first comment on my talk page.

Within about a week of becoming a "verified" member of Wikipedia, I received a welcoming comment on my talk page. The user linked to a number of helpful pages such as Your First Article and How to Write a Great Article that I continue to use today. However, it was the friendly language that the Wikipedian used that struck me more. He wrote, "I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!" long before I considered myself to be one. Although I will discuss the ways in which the criticism of my first article can be looked at as newcomer "hazing" in my next section, this message went a long way in making me feel less like a "noob" and more like an actual valued member of Wikipedia. In this way, I felt that I resonated most with Kraut and Resnick's Design Claim 18 throughout my initiation process, which states, "When newcomers have friendly interactions with existing community members soon after joining a community, they are more likely to stay longer and contribute more." It meant a lot to me that an existing member of the community, (rather than a member of our class), noticed I was new and made the effort to reach out. Cialdini's notion on reciprocity helps to explain why I was motivated to contribute more to the site after I received a friendly message from an authoritative community member. I felt that if an existing member took the time to reach out to a "noob", I should take the time to make valuable contributions to the community. In the next section I will switch gears to discuss the ways in which a speedy deletion nomination actually helped to motivate me further, and make me feel even more committed to Wikipedia as a whole.

Moving My Article to the Main Space: Newcomer Hazing?

While Wikipedia's specific design features successfully welcomed me to the community, the process of moving my article to the "main space" truly transformed me into a Wikipedian. In class we discussed the idea that newcomers often feel more committed to a community after they must undergo a somewhat "severe" initiation process. This idea was reflected through Aronson and Mills' findings of college-aged students increased commitment to a discussion group after they were forced to disclose embarrassing information. Kraut and Resnick also mention that "entry barriers for newcomers may cause those who join to be more committed to the group and contribute more to it." Although the tutorial and sandbox initiation tactics were harmless, the true "newcomer hazing" seemed to come almost immediately after I moved my article from the sandbox to the main space. As shown through Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative's History page, I added my article to the main space on March 3rd, and by March 4th, it was tagged for multiple issues, such as "Reference List Missing". By March 9th, another Wikipedian had tagged my article with "orphan" and "lead missing", both of which I did not understand at the time. I felt slightly overwhelmed that just two users had found so many issues with my article the minute I made it "public". However, the true "severe initiation", and hardest blow to my self-esteem, came when my article was tagged for "Speedy Deletion." This previous edit shows the "Speedy Deletion" tag on March 17th. I was originally terrified that all of my hard work could be removed from the site almost instantaneously, and even worse, felt like an "outsider" in a community of "elite" editors. However, after I realized that most of the edits were not only quick fixes, but necessary to any Wikipedia article, I took the "harsh criticism" as motivation to only make my Wikipedia article that much stronger.

Although not comparable to the severe hazing rituals of fraternities, or Debian's extensive process to become a Debian Developer, I believe the flood of tags from existing Wikipedians can be seen as "attacking" to some. At the same time, I now am much more confident that I will not make the same mistakes in the future if I ever contribute another article to the site, and feel as if the "hazing" I went through only secured my new-found Wikipedian identity.

Conclusion

Before this class, I never considered contributing to Wikipedia in any form, much less calling myself a "Wikipedian." I mistakenly believed that the editing process must be insanely challenging, and that even if I tried to edit an article, the "elitist" community would effectively revert my changes. I know now that members can essentially revert any edits, or even tag a page for "Speedy Deletion", but that most members will do so for the better of the entire community and encyclopedia, not as a means of severe "initiation". The tags are helpful guidelines to make a Wikipedia page as effective and useful to Wikipedians, as well as the general public, as possible. I also was able to adopt the editing process rather quickly through the helpful tutorial and sandbox design features. Although it may be some time before I add an entire new article due to the lengthy time commitment, I now consider myself a Wikipedian for life in the sense that I will not hesitate to make any edits I deem fit, whereas I never would have considered it before this class. Through Wikipedian's specific design features that helped me through the initiation process, the friendly gesture of an existing member, and the somewhat "severe" criticism I received upon moving my article to the main space, I am proud to say that Wikipedia has transformed me into a committed "Wikipedian."