Welcome to Wikipedia, Fabrice Florin! Thank you for
your contributions. I am
This, that and the other and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on
my talk page. You can also check out
Wikipedia:Questions or type {{
helpme}}
at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!
— This, that, and the other (talk) 06:23, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
No problem! If you need any help with anything, let me know. What sort of areas on Wikipedia are you interested in working in? --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk) 01:58, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Fabrice and thanks for the kitten. Just let me know if you have any questions or want to collaborate on any articles. Cheers,-- Rosiestep ( talk) 03:50, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
I see from Signpost that you've been hired as a "New Editor Guy" by WMF. This request might be slightly outside your purview, if you could pass it along to one of your colleagues it would be appreciated...
Thus far, WMF has attempted to identify the core cadre of "active editors" by the metric of number of edits. See, for example, Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits. The raw COUNT of edits — "X edits in the last month" or "X edits in the last year" is regarded as of decisive importance and the population of such editors is being tracked over time.
This has a real defect, however, in that it counts mundane quality control tasks, such as adding square brackets for links or switching n-dashes to m-dashes, on a par with actual CONTENT CREATION. The fuzzy language of calling everyone an "editor" is largely the cause of this.
What the foundation needs to do is to begin differentiating between quality control workers (copy editors) and content creators (writers) based on use of a new metric — the number of characters added to article space. Checking any history page for a wikipedia article you will see that each edit comes with a SIZE after the end of the signature. Each of these produces a delta figure, the amount of change over the last edit, see for example Recent Changes.
This means it should be technologically possible — and probably comparatively easy — for a WMF tech guru to begin collecting data for each editor based on the metric of characters added to mainspace. This would be far more useful information than a total count of the universe of (quality control workers + content creators) making X edits in a given time frame, which is the way WMF has traditionally looked at the population of Wikipedia volunteers.
Asides: (1) It is important to see changes in ARTICLE SPACE, not just changes overall, since some people spend all their time and massive amounts of prose on ultimately unproductive talk page debates and noticeboard dramafests. (2) Total characters of content is superior to total count of edits to mainspace since some solid content creators prefer to write their contributions out of mainspace and then to launch with a single edit containing 5,000 or 10,000 characters of content — which should be counted as more than 1 edit if you are trying to identify content creators. Others start small and peck along, creating the same amount of content with two dozen editors or more. The key metric is CHARACTERS OF CONTENT ADDED, not the raw EDIT COUNT.
Why is this important to you? I speculate that the number of actual writers is a small, relatively stable, and chronologically older population. There are all sorts of charts and graphs showing a dramatic decline in participation and retention and theories being advanced about how to "win" new editors. I argue that there are maybe 300 serious content creators on English WP, that number is pretty steady, and this population is not who you might think they are. I'm 50 for example, and I know that many of the most serious and prolific content creators are of a similar age. Trying to boost this core cadre with "feedback tools" etc. is probably fruitless.
How many of these content creators are there? What is their particular demography? What are the obstacles to participation by others of a similar demographic background? Those would seem to be big issues if one is given the task of expanding quality and quantity of WP content through the preservation and propagation of the writing pool.
Thanks. —Tim Davenport, Corvallis, OR /// Carrite ( talk) 17:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Fabrice - great to see you at the Teahouse...and at WMF :) SarahStierch ( talk) 17:50, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi! Welcome to the first edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!
You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. Sarah ( talk) 16:04, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
Dear Fabrice Florin, I just asked a question at the Teahouse that you might have interest in! I hope you'll stop by and participate! Sarah ( talk) 01:50, 21 March 2012 (UTC) |
Hi! Welcome to the second edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!
You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. -- Sarah ( talk) 21:36, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
Just wanted to drop by with a cookie. Thanks for your edits! Nathan2055 talk 22:14, 5 April 2012 (UTC) |
Hi! Welcome to the fourth issue of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter for the Teahouse!
Thank you and congratulations to all of the community members who participated - and continue to participate!
You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. Sarah ( talk) 16:40, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
Thanks for
this cheerful and encouraging feedback
![]() |
![]() |
Wikimania Barnstar |
It was great to see you at Wikimania 2012! -- evrik ( talk) 19:07, 15 July 2012 (UTC) |
With that in mind, here is a little slide-show I put together at Wikimania 2012 last week: How can we make Wikipedia better?. I asked 60 conference participants for ideas on how to make Wikipedia better and I found their suggestions very useful and truly inspiring! Fabrice Florin ( talk) 17:35, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
I was wondering if you would consider turning off auto flagging as abuse from filter 458. It has been discussed a couple times at Wikipedia_talk:Article_Feedback_Tool/Version_5 [1] [2] that the filter is generating a disproportionate number of false positives, and therefor undermining the utility of the abuse flagging system. I also cross posted to Wikipedia talk:Edit filter, but as you have worked on that filter before I thought it might be helpful to contact you as well. Monty 845 13:52, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
There's a complaint at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#WP:Article Feedback Tool/Version 5 that the feedback edit filters are misbehaving. Since you edited the filters a few hours ago, could you re-check your changes? -- John of Reading ( talk) 07:03, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi! Welcome to the fifth edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!
As always, thanks for supporting the Teahouse project! Stop by and visit us today!
You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. SarahStierch ( talk) 08:26, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
Cheers Fabrice. To see the general outline see what I did with Human rights in Djibouti a couple days ago. It will end up being more than a few sentences, don't worry... just give me time. That collection of external links gives me (and other editors) bookmarks for future references. I just think every country deserves a "Human rights" article so am going through the remaining African nations now. PhnomPencil talk contribs 20:22, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Please don't add stub tags to articles which already have a specific stub tag. It only wastes other editors' time. Thanks. Pam D 23:23, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello Fabrice Florin,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged TestPageForNewPagesFeed2 for deletion, because it doesn't seem to have any encyclopedic content.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks, Cmcmahon(WMF) ( talk) 21:31, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi! Welcome to the sixth edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!
As always, thanks for supporting the Teahouse project! Stop by and visit us today!
You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. EdwardsBot ( talk) 00:06, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I changed your File:Curation Toolbar Speedy Deletion Tags Aug 10 2012.png because it showed the green OK of already accepted article. I have just system scrollbars though, so if you want consistency with other NPF help images upload your version of not-yet-reviewed marked-to-deletion Page Curation toolbar. See you --21:05, 25 September 2012 (UTC), Utar ( talk)
I especially liked your Fort Barry and Fort Baker shots.
All the best.
Smallbones( smalltalk) 18:39, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
I think this is a great example of a successful editor engagement program, for a variety of reasons:
I really enjoyed participating as a volunteer in this contest, and found it a very compelling way to contribute to Wikipedia. As a result, I now plan to start articles on some of the historic sites I photographed which do not have articles yet. (Thanks for your kind words about my Fort Barry and Fort Baker shots.)
And in my official role as product manager at Wikimedia, I look forward to applying some of the lessons learned from this successful project to some of our other editor engagement programs.
Thanks again for making all this possible! Fabrice Florin ( talk) 19:00, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello again! We have some neat updates about the Teahouse:
Thanks again! Ocaasi 02:24, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
It's been a full year since the Teahouse opened, and as we're reflecting on what's been accomplished, we wanted to celebrate with you.
Teahouse guests and hosts are sharing their stories in a new blog post about the project.
1 year statistics for Teahouse visitors compared to invited non-visitors from the pilot:
Metric | Control group | Teahouse group | Contrast |
---|---|---|---|
Average retention (weeks with at least 1 edit) | 5.02 weeks | 8.57 weeks | 1.7x retention |
Average number of articles edited | 58.7 articles | 116.9 edits | 2.0x articles edited |
Average talk page edits | 36.5 edits | 85.6 edits | 2.4x talk page edits |
Average article space edits | 129.6 edits | 360.4 edits | 2.8x article edits |
Average total edits (all namespaces) | 182.1 edits | 532.4 edits | 2.9x total edits |
Over the past year almost 2000 questions have been asked and answered, 669 editors have introduced themselves, 1670 guests have been served, 867 experienced Wikipedians have participated in the project, and 137 have served as hosts. Read more project analysis in our CSCW 2013 paper
Last month January was our most active month so far! 78 profiles were created, 46 active hosts answered 263 questions, and 11 new hosts joined the project.
Come by the Teahouse to share a cup of tea and enjoy a Birthday Cupcake! Happy Birthday to the Teahouse and thank you for a year's worth of interest and support :-)
Hey Fabrice Florin :). Just a note that the Article Feedback Tool, Version 5 has now been re-enabled. Let us know on the talkpage if you spot any bugs. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) ( talk) 00:49, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diplomacy |
For keeping a cool head amidst a lot of fierce feedback, I award you the Barnstar of Diplomacy (and Good Guidance).
'Getting it right' is an iterative process, and your attitude and communication style helps make that possible. Thanks! Ocaasi t | c 16:12, 15 May 2013 (UTC) |
Dear Fabrice! I'd like to thank you for your work for Wikipedia. Especially for you work on Notifications/Thanks. I really like this feature, because now it is so easy to thank someone for his or hers contributions. Every contributor has now the possibility to get feedback which is in my opinion very important. I wish you a nice week, yours Ephraim33 ( talk) 16:00, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
.
Welcome to Wikipedia, Fabrice Florin! Thank you for
your contributions. I am
This, that and the other and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on
my talk page. You can also check out
Wikipedia:Questions or type {{
helpme}}
at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!
— This, that, and the other (talk) 06:23, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
No problem! If you need any help with anything, let me know. What sort of areas on Wikipedia are you interested in working in? --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk) 01:58, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Fabrice and thanks for the kitten. Just let me know if you have any questions or want to collaborate on any articles. Cheers,-- Rosiestep ( talk) 03:50, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
I see from Signpost that you've been hired as a "New Editor Guy" by WMF. This request might be slightly outside your purview, if you could pass it along to one of your colleagues it would be appreciated...
Thus far, WMF has attempted to identify the core cadre of "active editors" by the metric of number of edits. See, for example, Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits. The raw COUNT of edits — "X edits in the last month" or "X edits in the last year" is regarded as of decisive importance and the population of such editors is being tracked over time.
This has a real defect, however, in that it counts mundane quality control tasks, such as adding square brackets for links or switching n-dashes to m-dashes, on a par with actual CONTENT CREATION. The fuzzy language of calling everyone an "editor" is largely the cause of this.
What the foundation needs to do is to begin differentiating between quality control workers (copy editors) and content creators (writers) based on use of a new metric — the number of characters added to article space. Checking any history page for a wikipedia article you will see that each edit comes with a SIZE after the end of the signature. Each of these produces a delta figure, the amount of change over the last edit, see for example Recent Changes.
This means it should be technologically possible — and probably comparatively easy — for a WMF tech guru to begin collecting data for each editor based on the metric of characters added to mainspace. This would be far more useful information than a total count of the universe of (quality control workers + content creators) making X edits in a given time frame, which is the way WMF has traditionally looked at the population of Wikipedia volunteers.
Asides: (1) It is important to see changes in ARTICLE SPACE, not just changes overall, since some people spend all their time and massive amounts of prose on ultimately unproductive talk page debates and noticeboard dramafests. (2) Total characters of content is superior to total count of edits to mainspace since some solid content creators prefer to write their contributions out of mainspace and then to launch with a single edit containing 5,000 or 10,000 characters of content — which should be counted as more than 1 edit if you are trying to identify content creators. Others start small and peck along, creating the same amount of content with two dozen editors or more. The key metric is CHARACTERS OF CONTENT ADDED, not the raw EDIT COUNT.
Why is this important to you? I speculate that the number of actual writers is a small, relatively stable, and chronologically older population. There are all sorts of charts and graphs showing a dramatic decline in participation and retention and theories being advanced about how to "win" new editors. I argue that there are maybe 300 serious content creators on English WP, that number is pretty steady, and this population is not who you might think they are. I'm 50 for example, and I know that many of the most serious and prolific content creators are of a similar age. Trying to boost this core cadre with "feedback tools" etc. is probably fruitless.
How many of these content creators are there? What is their particular demography? What are the obstacles to participation by others of a similar demographic background? Those would seem to be big issues if one is given the task of expanding quality and quantity of WP content through the preservation and propagation of the writing pool.
Thanks. —Tim Davenport, Corvallis, OR /// Carrite ( talk) 17:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Fabrice - great to see you at the Teahouse...and at WMF :) SarahStierch ( talk) 17:50, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi! Welcome to the first edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!
You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. Sarah ( talk) 16:04, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
Dear Fabrice Florin, I just asked a question at the Teahouse that you might have interest in! I hope you'll stop by and participate! Sarah ( talk) 01:50, 21 March 2012 (UTC) |
Hi! Welcome to the second edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!
You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. -- Sarah ( talk) 21:36, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
Just wanted to drop by with a cookie. Thanks for your edits! Nathan2055 talk 22:14, 5 April 2012 (UTC) |
Hi! Welcome to the fourth issue of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter for the Teahouse!
Thank you and congratulations to all of the community members who participated - and continue to participate!
You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. Sarah ( talk) 16:40, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
Thanks for
this cheerful and encouraging feedback
![]() |
![]() |
Wikimania Barnstar |
It was great to see you at Wikimania 2012! -- evrik ( talk) 19:07, 15 July 2012 (UTC) |
With that in mind, here is a little slide-show I put together at Wikimania 2012 last week: How can we make Wikipedia better?. I asked 60 conference participants for ideas on how to make Wikipedia better and I found their suggestions very useful and truly inspiring! Fabrice Florin ( talk) 17:35, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
I was wondering if you would consider turning off auto flagging as abuse from filter 458. It has been discussed a couple times at Wikipedia_talk:Article_Feedback_Tool/Version_5 [1] [2] that the filter is generating a disproportionate number of false positives, and therefor undermining the utility of the abuse flagging system. I also cross posted to Wikipedia talk:Edit filter, but as you have worked on that filter before I thought it might be helpful to contact you as well. Monty 845 13:52, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
There's a complaint at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#WP:Article Feedback Tool/Version 5 that the feedback edit filters are misbehaving. Since you edited the filters a few hours ago, could you re-check your changes? -- John of Reading ( talk) 07:03, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi! Welcome to the fifth edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!
As always, thanks for supporting the Teahouse project! Stop by and visit us today!
You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. SarahStierch ( talk) 08:26, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
Cheers Fabrice. To see the general outline see what I did with Human rights in Djibouti a couple days ago. It will end up being more than a few sentences, don't worry... just give me time. That collection of external links gives me (and other editors) bookmarks for future references. I just think every country deserves a "Human rights" article so am going through the remaining African nations now. PhnomPencil talk contribs 20:22, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Please don't add stub tags to articles which already have a specific stub tag. It only wastes other editors' time. Thanks. Pam D 23:23, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello Fabrice Florin,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged TestPageForNewPagesFeed2 for deletion, because it doesn't seem to have any encyclopedic content.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks, Cmcmahon(WMF) ( talk) 21:31, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi! Welcome to the sixth edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!
As always, thanks for supporting the Teahouse project! Stop by and visit us today!
You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. EdwardsBot ( talk) 00:06, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I changed your File:Curation Toolbar Speedy Deletion Tags Aug 10 2012.png because it showed the green OK of already accepted article. I have just system scrollbars though, so if you want consistency with other NPF help images upload your version of not-yet-reviewed marked-to-deletion Page Curation toolbar. See you --21:05, 25 September 2012 (UTC), Utar ( talk)
I especially liked your Fort Barry and Fort Baker shots.
All the best.
Smallbones( smalltalk) 18:39, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
I think this is a great example of a successful editor engagement program, for a variety of reasons:
I really enjoyed participating as a volunteer in this contest, and found it a very compelling way to contribute to Wikipedia. As a result, I now plan to start articles on some of the historic sites I photographed which do not have articles yet. (Thanks for your kind words about my Fort Barry and Fort Baker shots.)
And in my official role as product manager at Wikimedia, I look forward to applying some of the lessons learned from this successful project to some of our other editor engagement programs.
Thanks again for making all this possible! Fabrice Florin ( talk) 19:00, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello again! We have some neat updates about the Teahouse:
Thanks again! Ocaasi 02:24, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
It's been a full year since the Teahouse opened, and as we're reflecting on what's been accomplished, we wanted to celebrate with you.
Teahouse guests and hosts are sharing their stories in a new blog post about the project.
1 year statistics for Teahouse visitors compared to invited non-visitors from the pilot:
Metric | Control group | Teahouse group | Contrast |
---|---|---|---|
Average retention (weeks with at least 1 edit) | 5.02 weeks | 8.57 weeks | 1.7x retention |
Average number of articles edited | 58.7 articles | 116.9 edits | 2.0x articles edited |
Average talk page edits | 36.5 edits | 85.6 edits | 2.4x talk page edits |
Average article space edits | 129.6 edits | 360.4 edits | 2.8x article edits |
Average total edits (all namespaces) | 182.1 edits | 532.4 edits | 2.9x total edits |
Over the past year almost 2000 questions have been asked and answered, 669 editors have introduced themselves, 1670 guests have been served, 867 experienced Wikipedians have participated in the project, and 137 have served as hosts. Read more project analysis in our CSCW 2013 paper
Last month January was our most active month so far! 78 profiles were created, 46 active hosts answered 263 questions, and 11 new hosts joined the project.
Come by the Teahouse to share a cup of tea and enjoy a Birthday Cupcake! Happy Birthday to the Teahouse and thank you for a year's worth of interest and support :-)
Hey Fabrice Florin :). Just a note that the Article Feedback Tool, Version 5 has now been re-enabled. Let us know on the talkpage if you spot any bugs. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) ( talk) 00:49, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diplomacy |
For keeping a cool head amidst a lot of fierce feedback, I award you the Barnstar of Diplomacy (and Good Guidance).
'Getting it right' is an iterative process, and your attitude and communication style helps make that possible. Thanks! Ocaasi t | c 16:12, 15 May 2013 (UTC) |
Dear Fabrice! I'd like to thank you for your work for Wikipedia. Especially for you work on Notifications/Thanks. I really like this feature, because now it is so easy to thank someone for his or hers contributions. Every contributor has now the possibility to get feedback which is in my opinion very important. I wish you a nice week, yours Ephraim33 ( talk) 16:00, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
.