Grants:IdeaLab/Vet all new editors

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Red heart with heartbeat logo.svg
Vet all new editors
The quality of editing by some editors is abysmal. There are some pretty basic skills that are lacking by some users and vetting should weed out any recruits who end up wasting the time of the rest of the community.
countryNew Zealand
themeother
contact email• alanliefting@gmail.com
Hex icon with lightning white.svg
idea creator
Alan Liefting
this project needs...
Hex icon with hand black.svg
volunteer
join
endorse
created on04:09, 22 July 2018 (UTC)


Project idea[edit]

What Wikimedia project(s) and specific areas will you be evaluating?[edit]

Is this project measuring a specific space on a project (e.g. deletion discussions), or the project as a whole?
All projects

Describe your idea. How might it be implemented?[edit]

Provide details about the method or process of how you will evaluate your community or collect data. Does your idea involve private or personally identifying information? Take a look at the Privacy Policy for Wikimedia’s guidelines in this area.
I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition!

Are there experienced Wikimedians who can help implement this project?[edit]

If applicable, please list groups or usernames of individuals who you can work with on this project, and what kind of work they will do.
Yes

How will you know if this project is successful? What are some outcomes that you can share after the project is completed?[edit]

Yes, in the long term.

How would your measurement idea help your community make better decisions?[edit]

After you are finished measuring or evaluating your Wikimedia project, how do you expect that information to be used to benefit the project?
?

Do you think you can implement this idea? What support do you need?[edit]

Do you need people with specific skills to complete this idea? Are there any financial needs for this project? If you can’t implement this project, can you scale down your project so it is doable?
It has to be a communitoy initiative

Get Involved[edit]

About the idea creator[edit]

I had spent a lot of time editing WP as well as Wikimedia Commons. I discovered that what the community wants and what these important projects should be are two quite different things.

Too many editors treat it as a game, or a competition, or as a power trip, or as social media.

I no longer spend much time around here so don't expect any replies.

Participants[edit]

Endorsements[edit]

  • Weakish support for the theme--As much as I support the theme of the proposal, somewhere it does seem to violate the tenet of assuming good faith.And, I've reasons to think that all that it will do is to hinder good-faith-editors whilst allowing skilled vandals.I will be more open to the idea of segregating productive editors and assisting them to even higher levels of productivity but then, editor-mentoring over en-wiki is an entirely inactive project.....Winged Blades of Godric (talk) 08:32, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
  • I support the the idea behind the sentiment of "it does seem to violate the tenet of assuming good faith." Bluenautilus (talk) 09:46, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
  • "There are some pretty basic skills that are lacking by some users and vetting should weed out any recruits who end up wasting the time of the rest of the community." The purpose of the project seems to be contradicted by a basic typo later on: "It has to be a communitoy initiative". "Describe your idea. How might it be implemented?": "I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition!" So, no idea how it might be implemented then? "How will you know if this project is successful? What are some outcomes that you can share after the project is completed?": "Yes, in the long term." and "How would your measurement idea help your community make better decisions?": "?" - so we're not going to be able to measure the project or know if it's successful? In addition to violating the tenet of assuming good faith (and seeming to discourage new editors from joining) I'd have to vote against due to lack of detail. Sheridan (talk) 10:50, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Don't really see how it would work, but clearly a lot of volunteer work goes into undoing bad edits by people who haven't taken 10 seconds to learn the basics of how WP articles work. Any number of feel-good tutorial initiatives probably won't fix this. A bar to entry would actually be helpful. Equinox (talk) 12:34, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
  • I have no idea how to implement this idea, but if the proposal could be expanded into something feasible, that could actually be accomplished, then yes, I agree with Equinox that the quality of Wikipedia articles (as well as the experience of editing Wikipedia) would be improved.--FeralOink (talk) 13:02, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Expand your idea[edit]

Would a grant from the Wikimedia Foundation help make your idea happen? You can expand this idea into a grant proposal.

Expand into a Rapid Grant

No funding needed?[edit]

Does your idea not require funding, but you're not sure about what to do next? Not sure how to start a proposal on your local project that needs consensus? Contact Chris Schilling on-wiki at I JethroBT (WMF) (talk · contribs) or via e-mail at cschilling@wikimedia.org for help!