|
You state that you're an intern at the Wikimedia Foundation - do you have a WMF account? You should be using that account to officially represent yourself as an intern or employee with the organization if you're asking people to participate in your study... ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 17:56, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Hey folks! Sorry this happened while I was out wrecking myself in the Flint Hills so I've only just seen the messages now. Ewitch51 is working with my team as an intern. I'm sorry for all of this confusion. I have a few points to add to this discussion.
First and most importantly, if you feel that this is disruptive, it is. That means we should stop contacting folks until any details have been sorted out. Given that Adamw and I have vouched for Ewitch51, are there any more concerns?
Second, it's very common for researchers to ask for help to study the dynamics of Wikipedia through interview and survey invitations. I've been supporting these activities on a volunteer bases (via my volunteer account, EpochFail) for years. One does not need to be staff or have a relationship with the WMF to run a research project. I think it is to us as Wikipedians to decide which projects are valuable for our community and our concerns. I think the studies of civil behavior (and incivil behavior) are very important to us and we'd like to see these studies happen. (Alternatively, I think we're very tired of people surveying the most active editors to find out why they edit. For crying out loud!)
Finally, I wish there were an official process by which researchers who wish to ethically perform their research on Wikipedia can receive guidance and approval so we can fully avoid these problems. I've made proposals in the past and had pushback from both sides ("no policy needed" vs. "policy isn't strict enough") and I got tired of fighting the fight. Generally, I recommend that researchers who I work with clearly document their projects on Meta and make some posts in forums where their target participants frequent. If no serious concerns are raised about the project, I advise that the research proceeds with small batches of recruiting messages on talk pages (as opposed to emailing users directly) because it is easiest to track via recent changes and it is easy to interrupt if something is disruptive (like in this case) before too much disruption occurs.
I hope we can move forward from this and allow Ewitch to continue the civility research. Please let us know what you need from us before we can continue. -- Halfak (WMF) ( talk) 13:36, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi Ewitch51, Sorry but I don't want to be interviewed , I tried to email you at your given address but couldn't: emailer said address invalid or similar. I'm only new to Wikipedia and still learning the basics, so forgive me if you or anyone finds me uncivil, most of the time I don't know what to do ect. I haven't come across any uncivil comments/behaviour. Thank you for contacting me anyway, best wishes with your project! Passionfruitvine Passionfruitvine ( talk) 04:25, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
read this page about classifying edits as minor or not.Best, ∯WBG converse 03:24, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk) 11:08, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research_talk:Civil_Behavior_Interviews — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.30.143.137 ( talk) 16:38, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
Also, before your interview, it would be very helpful if you could please select one clearly uncivil talk page, and one clearly civil talk page (by your definition) to review with the interviewer. Thanks! Ewitch51 ( talk) 18:47, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the invitation - I'm sorry I can't participate Footnotefanatic ( talk) 04:52, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
Haven't we been over this before? I thought we wen't supposed to be doing this.... why is it continuing? ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 19:32, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
|
You state that you're an intern at the Wikimedia Foundation - do you have a WMF account? You should be using that account to officially represent yourself as an intern or employee with the organization if you're asking people to participate in your study... ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 17:56, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Hey folks! Sorry this happened while I was out wrecking myself in the Flint Hills so I've only just seen the messages now. Ewitch51 is working with my team as an intern. I'm sorry for all of this confusion. I have a few points to add to this discussion.
First and most importantly, if you feel that this is disruptive, it is. That means we should stop contacting folks until any details have been sorted out. Given that Adamw and I have vouched for Ewitch51, are there any more concerns?
Second, it's very common for researchers to ask for help to study the dynamics of Wikipedia through interview and survey invitations. I've been supporting these activities on a volunteer bases (via my volunteer account, EpochFail) for years. One does not need to be staff or have a relationship with the WMF to run a research project. I think it is to us as Wikipedians to decide which projects are valuable for our community and our concerns. I think the studies of civil behavior (and incivil behavior) are very important to us and we'd like to see these studies happen. (Alternatively, I think we're very tired of people surveying the most active editors to find out why they edit. For crying out loud!)
Finally, I wish there were an official process by which researchers who wish to ethically perform their research on Wikipedia can receive guidance and approval so we can fully avoid these problems. I've made proposals in the past and had pushback from both sides ("no policy needed" vs. "policy isn't strict enough") and I got tired of fighting the fight. Generally, I recommend that researchers who I work with clearly document their projects on Meta and make some posts in forums where their target participants frequent. If no serious concerns are raised about the project, I advise that the research proceeds with small batches of recruiting messages on talk pages (as opposed to emailing users directly) because it is easiest to track via recent changes and it is easy to interrupt if something is disruptive (like in this case) before too much disruption occurs.
I hope we can move forward from this and allow Ewitch to continue the civility research. Please let us know what you need from us before we can continue. -- Halfak (WMF) ( talk) 13:36, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi Ewitch51, Sorry but I don't want to be interviewed , I tried to email you at your given address but couldn't: emailer said address invalid or similar. I'm only new to Wikipedia and still learning the basics, so forgive me if you or anyone finds me uncivil, most of the time I don't know what to do ect. I haven't come across any uncivil comments/behaviour. Thank you for contacting me anyway, best wishes with your project! Passionfruitvine Passionfruitvine ( talk) 04:25, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
read this page about classifying edits as minor or not.Best, ∯WBG converse 03:24, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk) 11:08, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research_talk:Civil_Behavior_Interviews — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.30.143.137 ( talk) 16:38, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
Also, before your interview, it would be very helpful if you could please select one clearly uncivil talk page, and one clearly civil talk page (by your definition) to review with the interviewer. Thanks! Ewitch51 ( talk) 18:47, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the invitation - I'm sorry I can't participate Footnotefanatic ( talk) 04:52, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
Haven't we been over this before? I thought we wen't supposed to be doing this.... why is it continuing? ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 19:32, 31 August 2018 (UTC)