Talk:Training modules/Editathons/First Draft

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

High level feedback[edit]

This section is for high level feedback on the questions below, Astinson (WMF) (talk) 22:45, 2 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Overall, do you think a new event-runner would be able to run an editathon following completing this training?[edit]

What do you think about the organization and structure of the training?[edit]

  • I'm assuming that people are not going to be printing all of these words on slides and that these will just be for the presenter? Because depending on format, this is either way too wordy or basically at a good level. Jessamyn (talk) 22:04, 11 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jessamyn: Yes, the goal would be for folks that want to run Editathons, or run "Train the Trainer" workshops, as a framework for teaching folks how to run events -- I still will need to collect the actually training decks that folks use. I have gotten a couple of pieces of feedback that its too wordy, but in general the hope is to give it to text-oriented people so that they can effectively run events. Astinson (WMF) (talk) 20:29, 23 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Does the training provide too much information at any specific points?[edit]

Are there any gaps in the content that would prevent an effective event from being run?[edit]

Specific feedback on sections[edit]

Please provide specific feedback in the appropriate section for each module, Astinson (WMF) (talk) 22:45, 2 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Module 1[edit]


  • If the training is called Edit-a-thon, the slide should start defining what is an edit-a-thon
An edit-a-thon is an editing marathon, an event of simultaneous, collective editing on Wikipedia, at which people with different levels of expertise contributing to the Wikimedia projects get together - virtually or in person - to create or improve Wikipedia articles within a specific topic”[1]
  • “Editing events” is too general, and could refer to other editing events, which have their own characteristics, i.e., Editing Workshops, Writing contests, etc.
    Actually, this was very deliberate: a number of community members have expressed concern with "Editathon" as a title -- like "marathon", it suggests a painful and grueling process--,and historically these events run under a number of titles -- including but not limited to Backstage pass, editing workshop (whether or not its a workshop), smaller events that are really short and others. I would love to think through this more, but am reluctant to overemphasize something that doesn't really describe what is going on.Astinson (WMF) (talk) 17:09, 1 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • The list of topics that an edit-a-thon could cover should be a list, for ease of reading, which could also make identification easier. Yes check.svg Done
  • Consider embedding a video like this one that helps to describe the event. Yes check.svg Done

María (WMF) (talk) 19:21, 29 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What is this training?[edit]

  • I would make this the first slide. There is advice here Yes check.svg Done
  • Refrain from using “editing events”, as this is specific to edit-a-thons, and defining them is the first step to understanding how to replicate the program.
    X mark.svg Not done see comment in first section Astinson (WMF) (talk) 17:27, 1 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

María (WMF) (talk) 19:21, 29 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What is your goal?[edit]

  • First bullet should say that
[...] most organizers ran this type of event [...]

María (WMF) (talk) 19:21, 29 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Having realistic goals[edit]

  • Second bullet needs to be rephrased or clarified. Suggested re-phrasing:
Do not create very large volumes of content, when compared to the productivity of experienced editors, or when compared to more long-term programs like the Education Program. While creating a targeted, narrow content addition, edit-a-thons work best at:
  • developing awareness about the Wikimedia Community
  • developing awareness of knowledge gaps[2], and
  • understanding of Wikimedia projects.
Contributors during these events may be able to be reactivatedre-engaged later for other programs or activities, especially if your event is part of a series of events.

  • Would add a bullet at the end with the following:
Find out more information about setting goals and targets on the Learning and Evaluation portal on Meta Wikimedia.

María (WMF) (talk) 19:21, 29 August 2017 (UTC) Yes check.svg Done also added a bit more to this slide, to reconfigure it: was reading the last slide, and realized there was some redunancy.Astinson (WMF) (talk) 17:40, 1 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Preparation question[edit]

How do objectives compare to goals in program planning?
  • You could use this image to illustrate what a goal statement looks like, compared to an objective statement, before the preparation question.

María (WMF) (talk) 19:21, 29 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Light bulb iconB I like the idea! Will followup with it, when I shift to the more structured version of the training for the dashboard. Astinson (WMF) (talk) 17:44, 1 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Partner role and goals[edit]

Iolanda Pensa, Filling the knowledge gap.pdf
  • You can share Iolanda’s presentation at Wikimania as a link to learn more about what it means to partner with small GLAMs.
    X mark.svg Not done already a lot of information packed into these slides, don't want to accidentally push folks into getting sidetracked. Astinson (WMF) (talk) 17:47, 1 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • In the first bullet, I would highlight internet connectivity and computers, as this is key in developing countries (not just food). Yes check.svg Done

María (WMF) (talk) 19:21, 29 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Avoiding conflict of interest[edit]

  • I would change the opening sentence to focus on finding a partner that has shared or similar goals, and working together to build a plan that works for both parts.

María (WMF) (talk) 19:21, 29 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MCruz: Did a rewrite, does that respond to your concern? Astinson (WMF) (talk) 17:53, 1 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Preparation question[edit]

Paraphrase questions in the following way:

  • Can you think of a partner that can provide support for an edit-a-thon? What type of support can they provide?
  • How do your goals and your partner’s goals compare? What is your plan to address those goals?

María (WMF) (talk) 19:21, 29 August 2017 (UTC) Yes check.svg DoneAstinson (WMF) (talk) 17:54, 1 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Audiences changing planning[edit]

This title is not very descriptive. I would change it to “Target audience”.

María (WMF) (talk) 19:21, 29 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes check.svg DoneAstinson (WMF) (talk) 17:59, 1 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Working with underrepresented groups[edit]

The sentence about indigenous communities is not clear. Maybe an example would be helpful.

María (WMF) (talk) 19:21, 29 August 2017 (UTC) Yes check.svg DoneReply[reply]

Preparation question[edit]

This question is about messaging to target audiences. I would avoid using the phrase “modify your goal to communicate to your audience”; I propose instead:

Once you have identified your audience for the event, you need to work on appropriate messaging to communicate your activity, goal, and why their participation matters.
For example, if your main goal is to train and engage women to be contributors to Wikipedia, the audience might need a message focusing on activism -- one that focuses on the key role of women advancing knowledge on the internet, for example.
Preparation questions: Who is your audience? Write a message aimed at your target group that is inviting to participate.

María (WMF) (talk) 19:21, 29 August 2017 (UTC) Yes check.svg DoneReply[reply]

Wikimedia experience[edit]

  • Suggest changing the title of the slide to Experienced editors to newcomer ratio
  • Suggest changing the question in the opening sentence: Do you or your expected attendees [...] to guide newcomers during the edit-a-thon?
  • Check out use of pronouns on the second sentence for consistency.

María (WMF) (talk) 19:21, 29 August 2017 (UTC) Yes check.svg DoneReply[reply]

Finding help[edit]

  • Suggest changing the name of the section to Creating your working team and finding help.
  • Suggest changing the order of the list: swap the third and the first place, and leave “Contacting affiliates” as a second option.
  • When linking directly to the guides the groups have, use a mask that is descriptive of what the person will find by clicking on that link (e.g., systemic bias kit).
  • I wouldn’t advice people to do TWL, or give tips on basic editor training. We should assume that people who want to organize an edit-a-thon, either have sufficient editing skills themselves, or can contact people who do to support them on site. But suggesting that they can learn how to edit after they have set goals for their edit-a-thon, is a bit misleading I think.
  • Add something in this section about distributing roles. If you are finding help to host your edit-a-thon, have someone who is an admin user to protect articles, someone who can guide on wikification (a big learning curve for newcomers at edit-a-thons), someone who can walk others through uploading media to Commons, someone that can guide people on adding citations, etc. There are specific tasks that take place in during an edit-a-thon, that can be assigned to experienced contributors. This makes more sense as you move from designing to implementation.

María (WMF) (talk) 19:21, 29 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MCruz (WMF): Fixed most of these lines, but I worry a bit about not having a "What if you don't have enough experience" bit: Art+Feminism gets a lot of organizers with little/no experience at events, and we are increasingly getting a lot of independently organizing event-runners in regions like the U.S where there aren't going to be ready contributors. Astinson (WMF) (talk) 18:16, 1 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Preparation questions[edit]

  • I would add a question here about What specific tasks do you expect your participants to do? This is not a minor thing. Creating articles from scratch, improving existing articles, adding citations, adding images, using images on Wikipedia… all of these have different requirements in preparation for the edit-a-thon.

María (WMF) (talk) 19:21, 29 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

X mark.svg Not done That is a major section of the next module, Astinson (WMF) (talk) 18:18, 1 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

End of Module 1[edit]

  • If you are focusing on edit-a-thons, you should use that word here as well. It is not the same to call it Editing event, there are different practices in place for each editing event type.

María (WMF) (talk) 19:21, 29 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

References for María's comments[edit]

Module 2[edit]

  • I would suggest making the IP limitation part of understanding the tech setup and not putting it in the "day of" section. Jessamyn (talk) 22:13, 11 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes check.svg Done

Module 2 beginning[edit]

  • Would actually call this “Introduction to Module 2”
  • Check for “editing events” where “edit-a-thons” should be.
  • Make the opening shorter. It should be two sentences: “Module 1 was about event design, theme and planning. Module 2 is going to focus on logistics, communications and types of contributions to Wikimedia projects.”

María (WMF) (talk) 23:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes check.svg Done That section was awful, don't know why I didn't catch that sooner. Astinson (WMF) (talk) 19:58, 1 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  • Consider adding a bullet about how a venue can be a hook to participate. It can be an attraction in an of itself. WMMX, for example, promoted their 50 hours edit-a-thon by saying something like “spend a night at the Soumaya museum”, because they had a huge sleepover there.

María (WMF) (talk) 23:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Preparation question[edit]

  • Add a question about “Is your venue unique in any way?”

María (WMF) (talk) 23:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC) Yes check.svg DoneReply[reply]


  • Add a bullet about 6 account limit from the same IP [1].

María (WMF) (talk) 23:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MCruz (WMF): That is documented in module 3: do you think it needs to be here as well? Astinson (WMF) (talk) 23:13, 5 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Astinson (WMF): I think so, yes. It is good to repeat some things several times. María (WMF) (talk) 22:35, 11 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Communications plan[edit]

  • The mention about the audiences is a bit vague here. The way I see it, the person taking this training already decided who their audience was in module 1. Maybe add a comment here to go back to the notes from Module 1.
  • In this sense, I think the organizer is going to be the best person to determine who their audience is, so I would remove the second sentence (“For the most part…”)
  • I would mention the titles of slides coming, as a way to show what will be covered in this part.

María (WMF) (talk) 23:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC) Yes check.svg DoneReply[reply]

On-wiki communications[edit]

  • For the first bullet, I would link to one or two example event pages that can be taken as reference. Edit-a-thon organizers can copy some templates and structure.
    Each langauge Wiki has their own formatting, I wanted to structure the advice so that when translators come through, they can point to the existing resources. @MCruz (WMF): is there general best practice documented somewhere? It has been a while since I created an event page following instructions. Astinson (WMF) (talk) 23:18, 5 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Public communications[edit]

  • Suggest changing the second sentence to the following:
Many members of the public don’t understand what editing Wikimedia projects means: trusted staff at institutions can often encourage folks to participate, that might not take part in an edit-a-thon otherwise.

María (WMF) (talk) 23:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC) Yes check.svg DoneReply[reply]

Effective themes[edit]

  • Suggest changing title section to “Event theme”
  • Suggest changing the second sentence to the following:
A theme reflects the core concept of the event, and gives clear expectations to participants with regard to what they can contribute and learn by taking part of the event.

María (WMF) (talk) 23:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC) Yes check.svg DoneReply[reply]

Narrowing broad themes[edit]

  • Suggest changing the title section to “Narrowing the focus of your theme”

María (WMF) (talk) 23:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC) Yes check.svg DoneReply[reply]

Types of articles for edit-a-thons[edit]

  • Suggest changing title section to “Editing articles”, which makes for a more cohesive narrative in line with other changes proposed below, if someone is reading the headlines of the training.

María (WMF) (talk) 23:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC) Yes check.svg DoneReply[reply]

Edit-a-thons focused on limited contributions[edit]

  • Suggest changing title section to “Other forms of contribution to Wikipedia during an edit-a-thon”

María (WMF) (talk) 23:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC) Yes check.svg DoneReply[reply]

Identifying existing content for expansion[edit]

  • Suggesting adding “Articles that don’t have many footnotes…” to the last bullet for consistency.

María (WMF) (talk) 23:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC) Yes check.svg DoneReply[reply]

Topics to avoid[edit]

  • This slide should be right after “Narrowing the focus of your theme”; by doing so, you have a more consistent order:
  1. Event theme
  2. Narrowing the focus of your theme
  3. Topics to avoid.
The event organizer has chosen a theme, and is ready to move forward choosing the articles.

María (WMF) (talk) 23:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC) Yes check.svg DoneReply[reply]

Identifying new articles for editing events[edit]

  • Suggest changing title section to “Identifying content gaps for edit-a-thons”
  • When talking about creating red links, make a connection to the event page, as this will be the starting working area.

María (WMF) (talk) 23:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

End of Module 2[edit]

  • I would add to the list, a fourth bullet: “Create a working list for your event.”

María (WMF) (talk) 23:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

References to María's comments

Yes check.svg Done

  1. There is a Learning Pattern about this.

Module 3[edit]

"After the event" mentions adding Usernames to the Programs and Events dashboard. I remember reading before that users need to give specific permission to have their usernames tracked unless they sign up on-wiki. Might be helpful to mention Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 19:48, 7 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Rachel Helps (BYU): Huh, I don't remember that being the case. Going to check in with @JAnstee (WMF): who was the original creator of that, and check what the most recent opinion is. The thing about on-wiki accounts is that they are public, so your work is being tracked. There might be privacy concerns about associating folks with in person events/locations, however. Astinson (WMF) (talk) 21:19, 7 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rachel Helps (BYU): So I talked with folks at Wikimania, and the principle only applies to folks who don't publically sign up for the event. I have clarified that in the instructions for after the event. Astinson (WMF) (talk) 16:05, 24 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you! Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 17:41, 24 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Overall, general feedback[edit]

  • There are not enough preparation questions. I suggest adding the following:
  • After “What should you teach new editors?” → Ask the user taking the training to do an outline of the presentation they would like to prepare, if possible, with topics per slide, and a list of resources they’ll use as support.
  • After “Keeping the space active” → Ask the user taking the training to come up with a list of tasks that will be needed during the event, the people responsible for them, and the frequency in which they happen.
  • After “After the event!” → A preparation question about what kind of thank you note will the organizer share.

María (WMF) (talk) 00:28, 7 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Slide: Creating your programs and events dashboard event[edit]

  • Suggest changing title to “Creating your Dashboard event”.
  • Check for grammar and punctuation:
    • “its” instead of “it’s”
    • Comma after First.
  • Alternate the order of second and third bullets, as the logical organizations would be: first focus on your event, then consider how it relates to other events.
  • Suggest re-writing last sentence to:
To register participants in your dashboard event, you can:
  • ask participants to sign up there in advance of the event.
  • add participants manually during the event and after it has ended.

María (WMF) (talk) 00:28, 7 September 2017 (UTC)Yes check.svg DoneReply[reply]

Slide: Reminders before the event[edit]

  • Link this learning pattern here as well, in the second bullet.
  • Suggest changing phrasing in the third bullet:
Reminders about timing or other logistical details for the event:[...]

María (WMF) (talk) 00:28, 7 September 2017 (UTC)Yes check.svg DoneReply[reply]

Slide: Being prepared to welcome editors[edit]

  • Review grammar overall, especially on the third bullet. Comma in last sentence is unnecessary.

María (WMF) (talk) 00:28, 7 September 2017 (UTC) Yes check.svg DoneReply[reply]

Slide: Training new editors[edit]

  • Suggest searching on Commons or asking on Wikipedia Weekly for slides that you can provide as examples here. There are a lot, and can serve as good starting point!

María (WMF) (talk) 00:28, 7 September 2017 (UTC) Yes check.svg DoneReply[reply]

Slide: What should you teach new editors?[edit]

  • Is type B article an actual denomination used on English Wikipedia? If not, would suggest rephrasing.
    X mark.svg Not done Yep B-Class is the highest unreviewed class of article on enwiki, and is a fairly common quality type (and frequently has quality similar to GA articles. Sadads (talk)
  • Add here the Wikipedia Reference cards, instead of the following slide, as it is related to the topic more, I think. Link to all existing ones, not just the English version. Also, mention that it is better to have this printed out, for ease of quick consultation. Yes check.svg Done

María (WMF) (talk) 00:28, 7 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Slide: Other knowledge to prepare[edit]

  • The slides for introduction should actually be part of “Training new editors”, where this comes up.

María (WMF) (talk) 00:28, 7 September 2017 (UTC) Yes check.svg Done `Reply[reply]

Slide: Maintaining a Safe Space[edit]

María (WMF) (talk) 00:28, 7 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MCruz (WMF): The problem with both of these policies, is that neither of them is "official" or directly including Editathons in their scope.... I am inclined to make them less prominent. Sadads (talk) 19:10, 14 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Sadads: I don't think I understand what you mean by official. These policies where created in collaboration by Foundation staff and community, in response to a need hosting Wikimedia events, and they are required at Wikimedia sponsored events. If any documentation should be considered as guidance for maintaining a safe space, these two should be it. María (WMF) (talk) 16:48, 18 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@MCruz (WMF): Oops, that was me on my volunteer account -- I have some thoughts, will touch base again off-wiki, Astinson (WMF) (talk) 23:46, 18 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Slide: After the event[edit]

  • The tone of this slide, in the beginning, seems a bit off. I wouldn't say it’s unfortunate that everything does not stop after the edit-a-thon end. I would think an edit-a-thon organizer is excited to keep the motivation up.
  • Fourth bullet has a mistake.
  • Add a bullet about monitoring the progress of the content created or improved after the edit-a-thon ends, as a follow up report with the partner organization.
  • When talking about writing a blogpost or a blurb in the newsletter, I suggest starting with the following sentence:
Share your experience with the broader Wikimedia movement: write about what you learned, what you would do differently, and why this event mattered.
  • Consider adding a bullet about thanking editors with an event-specific template shared on their talk page. Wikimedia México does this very well. There are many examples here.

María (WMF) (talk) 00:28, 7 September 2017 (UTC) Yes check.svg Done Did most of these with some modification. Astinson (WMF) (talk) 19:30, 14 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Recommendations for illustrations[edit]

Please recommendations for illustrations or other multimedia in this section, Astinson (WMF) (talk) 22:45, 2 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Random thoughts[edit]

Please add yours below:

  1. Have an Account creator onsite
  2. Wikilink more words/topics

Cheers! Checkingfax (talk) 15:46, 3 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Checkingfax: Does the section at Training_modules/Editathons/First_Draft#Slide:_Common_technical_challenges address the concern about Account Creator? The training also reminds on multiple occasions that folks should create accounts ahead of time. Does there need to be more information (also as part of the ACTRIAL conversation, there might be an "event runners" right created to solve some of the autoconfirm issues as well). Astinson (WMF) (talk) 16:12, 3 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also on the WikiLinks! Yes please! I believe interwiki links don't work in the dashboard, so please do it with full urls (thats going to be a cleanup task for me during the next round of drafting). Astinson (WMF) (talk) 16:14, 3 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, Astinson (WMF). Looks like you are on top of it. I can assist after Wikimania, if you poke me. Cheers! Checkingfax (talk) 17:20, 3 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]