User talk:CaroleHenson/Getting Started Concepts

While UNDER CONSTRUCTION

Background

This article is written for non-technical people new to Wikipedia to help them understand some concepts before they dig into the Wikipedia reference material. The intention is to provide concepts and process information so that they have an overview of how to create and edit articles. When links are provided, there is generally an explanation of what they will find by clicking the link.

Hopefully new people to Wikipedia will be less likely to be surprised when the article that they worked on gets reworded or reverted to a previous version. It's also created to explain how collaborative the process is - and like any collaborative process the intention is to deliver a better outcome. The original author does not "own" the article.

Other key points are some basics about how Wikipedia works - it's not a word processing application, codes are needed to control how the page operates. It's helpful to know that there are project teams to manage topical information and set guidelines. Categories assist them in locating similar information.--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:59, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To do list (for the moment)

Determine style for these types of articles - and apply
Write the intro/welcome section describing the purpose of the document, what may be found here, who may be interested in reading this
Add links for "Creating an article section"
Describe that in the process of finding references, great material may be found that you may not have been aware of
Add info for sections at the bottom of the draft
Add terminology links and explanation (from the links)
Do a run-through of an article to capture missing steps or helpful information
Add images
Consider putting resources info in a table
See what type of info or formatting might be useful from User:AndrewvdBK/Templates/Template:Welcome - Get's your attention to some keys points, in a different style than used in welcome and other materials (i.e., acceptable?)--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:59, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reasoning for this page

I started this page to help give people a primer to how Wikipedia operates, not how to get things done. The "how to get things done" are covered in the links.

This is based on my experience and others where it seems hard to learn the ropes initially and hoping this background, in a conversational tone, might help people with little technical background get started. I'm not sure if it will be useful, but I thought I'd put it out there to see if it could get incorporated into "Getting Started" or another place that may be more appropriate.

It's kind of like a crash-course in Wiki for dummies.--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:32, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me Carole - I suspect that the majority of people come in pretty blind - ie they see something on a page and think its wrong, or decide to add to it, with no idea of any guidelines or how wiki mark up works or anything, and you seem to be covering the usual pitfalls in a pretty balanced and informative way. Good Job Panderoona (talk) 16:03, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Panderoona, thanks so much! If you think of any further pitfalls, I'd appreciate you passing them along. Later today I'm going to make some of the "techy-ish" terms more common language - and have more to write. When I get a little further, do you mind taking another look? Thanks again! (From Sitush's talk page), I'm glad to hear you're having fun writing articles about the towns near you. I ended up writing an article about my mother's idyllic town and had to say to myself and my mother about some of the things we discussed - like managing information known to be true, but not verifiable (one of our favorite words, right?). I hope you're doing well! Thanks for taking a peak!--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:50, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One thing I will point out - that may or may not prove useful - what drives someone to consider making their first edit? Answer being, its probably something they are a bit passionate about - such as your art, or my lincolnshire villages - and in particular Brothertoft of course. That can sometimes lead to a conflict of interest as we all know, so perhaps there is some way we can kind of highlight that we are aware of that, when explaining to newbies how it all works?

As for Brothertoft itself, I managed to find out even more afterwards, I know exactly which school was which now, Gee built his school by adding it onto his gatehouse - and thats the one that is today the village hall (the painting I sent you) and the school built by the school board was Barley Sheaf School in Holland Fen, which is why most of the local kids at Brothertoft went to Hedgehog Bridge - It was nearer. I also found images of Cartwrights mill, and the little hamlet for his workers, called Isatica, was between Brothertoft and the North Forty Foot Bank. I find it a constant journey of information, and its very fulfilling. Glad to see you are doing really well with your pages too. Panderoona (talk) 17:24, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tips, good points! I'll work them in. I'm glad that you keep gleaning information about Brothertoft - who could have imagined all that came out? It's been a bit like that for the article of the town my mother is living in -- and I even got a cross-connection to Van Gogh. One of the authors that flocked to the artist's (and writer's) colony was also one of Van Gogh's favorite, oft-quoted authors. How funny is that?--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:34, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to be of help :) I have to say Im astounded really about the amount of info WE found on one small apparently nondescript village. I havent been so lucky with some of the other Lincs villages, but hey ho I guess you cant have it all. Panderoona (talk) 18:17, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just adding another thought. Regarding that "banging your head on the wall" feeling when you happen to know something, but dont know where to find a reliable source and all that. Something which I repeatedly came up against. Whilst time consuming, it also increased my knowledge of the place, and there really is a reward in that on a personal level. It did teach me to get back out there and keep on looking :) Panderoona (talk) 20:13, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's really nice to hear, that in the process you learned more and found it rewarding!--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:59, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I learnt more about Wikipedia and how it works - but I also learnt more about the village. When I spoke to my family it was all agreed, that the image of the original parish chapel of ease was fantastic. The only other thing that really got them going was the image of Cartwrights Mill on the North Forty Foot Bank page. And Sitush found that image of the Chapel so fair play to him for that. It really did teach me that if you are sent off to hunt for citations you might well hit solid gold. Panderoona (talk) 21:12, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great quote!--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:33, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Its a lesson in learning - its never done, and more gets put online by the day. Take the Site "Lincs To The Past" for one - it only came online this month. The lesson is EXPLORE and then EXPLORE more... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panderoona (talk • contribs) 21:49, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A few considerations on getting started

I think you are making good progress on all this but I am a bit concerned that if newcomers are faced with all these details from the very start, they may well be frightened away. I wonder whether it would be more encouraging for them to have an initial set of "essentials" telling them how to draft their very first article. All the "additional extras" (images, tags, infoboxes, sophisticated formatting, etc.) could then be left for later. I am a great believer in "learning on the job". Your "Getting Started Concepts" could then become more of a beginner's reference document containing explanations about everything that comes up along the way.

One thing that is perhaps missing at the moment is a simple guide to text formatting: how to get bold text, italics, indents, headings, etc. How to link is also important. (And what does "wikify" mean?) This could all be explained either on the basis of the Wikipedia icons and prompts in the edit space as well as by the use of keyboard-based characters. Most people have difficulty with this at the very beginning. They often mess up the formatting of other documents they are trying to edit for correctness as they cannot see what they are doing. Similarly, rather than introduce newbies to the rather complex area of citations for reference, I would suggest simple guidance in how to point to an external web page and how to add suitable text for referencing or external links.

So what I am suggesting is that this could all be broken down into two separate documents:

Wikipedia:Getting started: essentials for beginners (which should be short and simple)
Wikipedia:Getting started: overview of frequently used features (similar to what you are doing now)

Each document would of course refer and link to the other.

Do you think this would be helpful? - Ipigott (talk) 08:57, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that sounds good - I was getting concerned about it's length, too. What are your thoughts about what would be in the essentials? And, where do you see "wikify"?--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:15, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The essentials are what you need to produce the simplest type of acceptable Wikipedia article. You need to have the basic stuff about reliability, objectivity, notability but the thrust should be how to handle the mechanisms for presentation of text, references and categories. You already have most of what is needed. But I think it would be better if you tried to put it together yourself. You are new enough to remember the difficulties. - Ipigott (talk) 16:43, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, writing it from the perspective of what are the things someone would need to know to write the simplist, acceptable article helps. By the way, you are a very good editor, on the par with the Communications departments I've worked with to finalize copy.--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:24, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind words. As a Brit, I sometimes hestitate making too many changes to American English although I've lived in Canada and frequently worked with U.S. companies over the years.

I see you have added a comment on the essentials at the beginning of the document. It's the more complex wiki markup we need to avoid here. Some simple info on the basics of text display (bold, italics, etc.) would be fine. In this connection, you also asked about "wikify". It's a term which is frequently used in criticizing WP articles when beginners are simply told that their article needs to be "wikified". In the "Wikipedia:Glossary" it's defined as follows;

"To format using Wiki markup (as opposed to plain text or HTML). It commonly refers to adding internal links to material (Wikilinks) but is not limited to just that. To wikify an article could refer to applying any form of wiki-markup, such as standard headings and layout, including the addition of infoboxes and other templates, or bolding/italicizing of text. Noun: wikification; gerund: wikifying."

So there you are. What next? - Ipigott (talk) 09:51, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've been hoping that someone from the Wikipedia talk:Welcoming committee page would weigh in on the deletion and Getting started/essentials pages, but I've not seen any activity on my posting there. It would be a shame to put in a lot more work and then be told that the pages wouldn't be implemented. What do you think is the best next step? Should I have posted this question somewhere else?--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:04, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You could always post something on one of the Wikipedia:Village pump pages, perhaps the Miscellaneous one would be the best. There is no guarantee you will get a response but people do tend at least to read what you post there. I suggest you explain your concern that newbies are often frightened away, that you would like to make their initial WP experience less frightening (you have experience of your own to report) and that you would also like to provide more incentives for experienced Wikipedians to be kinder in their communications with newcomers. You could explain that you have had no reactions on the Welcoming committee page but that you think the issue is important as the need to encourage new WP editors to stay is an important item in Wikimedia's central strategy. You could also ask if anyone has any advice about where you should go from here. As a last resort, you could always write to Sue Gardner. Good luck! - Ipigott (talk) 17:20, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful! Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:20, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]