User:TwinsMetsFan/The straight truth about WikiWork
 | This is an essay which contains the advice or opinions of one or more members of the U.S. Roads WikiProject. While it is not a part of the standards the project promotes, it provides some recommendations and ideas for members to consider. |
The creation of the "relative WikiWork" statistic has had a profound change on the way WikiProject U.S. Roads and the state highway projects have operated. These changes have been both for the better and for the worse in terms of article quality, overall project status, and the mindset of editors. Certain events along the way have also resulted in these changes, but the effects brought on by the relative WikiWork number cannot be underscored enough.
Background
[edit]Originally, the WikiWork statistic was limited to what is now called "total WikiWork"; that is, the total number of classes needed to get every article within the project's assessment system to Featured Article status—an achievement that is truthfully impossible to accomplish. With this in mind, it was suggested that the total WikiWork number be divided by the number of articles in the project to give the average quality of an article within the project. This venture was the beginning of the now-ever-so-popular "relative WikiWork". At this time, it was simple in nature—it was confined to the U.S. Roads WikiProject, acting as a barometer of how well the project stacked up against other projects of varying sizes and qualities.
The downhill (or uphill, depending on the vantage points presented below) descent (or ascent) began when code was added to the {{U.S. Roads WikiProject}} banner to tally article qualities by state, leading to the creation of a subpage breaking down the quality of articles by "subproject" (later renamed to state). This subpage has come to be known as the "leaderboard" in some circles and has been updated a shade over 300 times (as of April 1, 2008) since its creation in late October 2007. This works out to be roughly twice a day, which is fine—however, there have been days where this page has been edited a dozen times. 12 edits that, IMO, could have been made in a more productive manner—even if this manner is combining a series of small edits into a medium-sized update.
Now, that issue may be just a pet peeve kicking in, but the next issue is not. The creation of the table has undeniably caused conflict—whether it be on the talk page of the U.S. Roads Project, on the Freenode wiki roads IRC channel, or in other venues. It has led to concerns over "will this article (already tagged or untagged) hurt my standing on the board". It has led to editors pounding their chest because their project is so much farther "ahead" than others (of which I am shamefully guilty of on a small handful of occasions). And it has, in my opinion, ultimately led to the degeneration of the U.S. Roads WikiProject as a collaboration and has turned it into a battlefield, which is pretty evident just by glancing the page on any given day. But the table has also done good things—which is what makes the presentation of the straight truth about it and about WikiWork very, very difficult.
Effects
[edit]Pro and con relationships
[edit]The following are a sampling of effects from the creation of WikiWork, both good and bad.
| Pro | Con |
|---|---|
| The average article quality of articles within the U.S. Roads WikiProject is at an all-time high. | Most of the improvements since the creation of WikiWork, and especially since the creation of the leaderboard, have been state-specific as editors look to get their state "to the top" (which I am as guilty of as anyone). While excellent states get better, lackluster states with no editors remain in their dust. The amount of articles in the "needing attention" category also grows on a seemingly daily basis. Thus, the disparity between the "best" states and the "worst" states is also at an all-time high. |
| Editors are motivated by their relative WikiWork number to improve existing articles in the project. | Editors are reluctant to add articles to the project, whether it be an existing article that went untagged or a newly created article. This does tie into the now-infamous scope issues, so I'll leave it at that. |
| Editors take pride in their project's WikiWork, and thus their project. | The WikiWork of a project is not the most important thing in the world by any stretch of the imagination. We're here to write an encyclopedia, not calculate statistics. |
| WikiWork has created friendly competition between states (editors), especially on IRC, benefitting both involved. | This competition often goes over the top, with users "bragging" (and I use that term loosely) about how much farther "ahead" their project is than another's. Sure, that can be spun to say "if you don't like it, do work" but a good sport wouldn't go out of their way to pump themselves up. Let the articles speak for themselves. |
Others
[edit]- Scope disputes: The scopes of the U.S. Roads WikiProject and the state highway subprojects have been in flux for a while—partly for other reasons, partly for WikiWork as detailed above. Since this is well documented in various locations around the wiki, I feel no reason to recap it here. And since there's an ArbCom case open at the moment partially regarding this issue, I don't believe I'm at liberty to delve any deeper than this.
- Degeneration of WT:USRD: The talk page of the U.S. Roads WikiProject has become much more hostile in recent months as a result of—you guessed it—scope issues. The amount of actual collaboration there during this time frame has been minimal; at the same time, several state highway subprojects are thriving with little to no drama in sight. Two reasons for this: 1) a willingness to improve their articles and 2) an explicitly defined scope—state highways. USRD, meanwhile, has become so fragmented of a project that no one can agree on anything. As an "enforcer" of subtle multi-state items, like infoboxes and browsing, USRD functions well—but as for an actual WikiProject where collaboration occurs, those days appear to be long gone. It's also no secret that some users who are heavily active in USRD and state subprojects avoid USRD for this very reason. I've slowly become much the same way.
- A lack of focus: Some users focus solely on the WikiWork statistics when they edit articles. This, to me, is giving the WikiWork statistics way too much importance. Am I biased in this statement, coming from a large state where article improvement barely moves the WikiWork? Maybe, but I ask for an open mind. What was our goal on Wikipedia prior to WikiWork? It was to improve articles. The original text of the New York state highway WikiProject banner was that the goal was to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to NYSDOT numbered routes in New York State. Scope aside, "build a comprehensive and detailed guide to [state highways]" seems like a much different goal than to have some arbitrary WikiWork number or reach some arbitrary milestone. I personally no longer rely on these type of statistics to gain incentive—instead, I use the raw quality numbers and the desire to have, as the original project banner read, a "comprehensive and detailed guide" to the current numbered state highway system as my motivation. That is what we're here for, anyway.
Moral
[edit]The moral of all of this is that WikiWork can do good, but at the end of the day it's just a number. What ultimately matters when all is said and done are the articles themselves. WikiWork should be no more than a potential motivational tool or one of those once-in-a-while numbers that someone calculates every other month to see, in the words of Matchbox Twenty, "how far we've come". Anything more than that, and the original goal of wiki editing is, in my view, lost.