Research:Progression system for newer editors
This research was conducted in to better understand how new editors experience their first months on Wikipedia, how they perceive Growth features, and how they respond to the idea of a progression system that could help them learn, stay motivated, and receive recognition for their contributions.
Supporting contributors and understanding their motivations is a key Wikimedia Foundation priority this year. The Growth team is exploring whether a progression system could help newcomers feel successful and engaged through clear milestones, suggested next steps, and lightweight forms of recognition.
The study sought to answer:
What are new editors’ early experiences and main challenges? What motivates or discourages them to continue editing? How do they perceive systems of learning and recognition on other online platforms? How do they respond to a prototype progression system for Wikipedia?
Methods
[edit]We interviewed 10 newer editors (6 from English Wikipedia, 4 from French Wikipedia) who had made between 5 and 100 edits. Participants included both editors who primarily used Suggested Edits and those who edited independently. All had experience with progression or leveling systems elsewhere (e.g., Duolingo, Coursera, online games).
While small, the sample provided rich insights. No major differences were observed between the English and French participants.
Timeline
[edit]This project began in FY25-26 Q1 and was completed in Q2.
Policy, Ethics and Human Subjects Research
[edit]This study followed the Wikimedia Foundation's data retention guidelines and data publication guidelines.
Respondents were able to review the project's privacy statement, and scheduled interviewees reviewed and signed a project-specific release form prior to participation.
Results
[edit]Key Findings
[edit]1. Onboarding and Learning Curve
[edit]- Most newcomers start independently, with little structured onboarding beyond Suggested Edits.
- Suggested tasks can feel either too simple or too unclear.
- Policies, formatting, and editing rules are often confusing and not presented in one accessible place.
- Source editing feels intimidating but is preferred by some for its flexibility.
- Mentor experiences vary widely: from very helpful to unresponsive.
2. Motivation and Feedback
[edit]- Interest can fade quickly after a revert or negative comment, especially without explanation.
- Constructive feedback and clear guidance strengthen motivation.
- Mentorship, when available, helps new editors feel welcomed and supported.
3. Perceptions of a Progression System
[edit]- Editors liked the idea of having direction and learning milestones, but worried about over-gamification.
- Tasks should feel meaningful, not arbitrary checklists.
- Many wanted transparency: how validation works, what milestones mean, and how far the system extends.
- Long milestones (e.g., 500 edits or six months) felt discouraging without context or explanation.
4. Recognition and Rewards
[edit]- Preferences for recognition varied widely: some liked visible achievements or stats, others preferred rare badges or peer acknowledgment.
- Most valued community-based recognition (thanks, barnstars, quality designations) over automated rewards.
- Editors emphasized intrinsic motivation (helping others and improving knowledge) over external incentives.
5. Wikipedia’s Identity
[edit]- Many participants expressed pride in Wikipedia’s uniqueness and concern about features that might make it feel like a game.
- While light gamification could support engagement, most wanted to preserve Wikipedia’s integrity and focus on knowledge-sharing rather than competition.