Wikimedians in Residence Exchange Network/Best practices for contribution

Let's start!

Suggested structure: (Overview about contributing to Wikipedia as WiR, and COI)

Purpose of a Wikimedian in Residence

The purpose of a WiR is to bring the knowledge of their institution to Wikimedia, not to promote their institution or its viewpoints. Therefore, WiRs should generally refrain from editing about their institution, including its key people and its projects. They should also refrain from encouraging others to edit on these topics. Work on these topics should never constitute more than a small aspect of the WiR engagement, and should never be promotional in nature.

WiRs should focus on sharing the factual knowledge of the institution. They should avoid promoting its positions on controversial issues such as politics or religion.

What conflict of interest is and is not

Example: Suppose Alice is a Wikimedian in Residence at the Vancouver Aquarium. In this position, she has a clear conflict of interest with regards to the following topics:

• The Vancouver Aquarium
• Herschend Family Entertainment (owners of the institution)
• John Nightingale (key staff member)
• Moby Doll (project of the institution)
• Coalition for No Whales in Captivity (an organization that has been in sustained direct conflict with the institution)

Alice does not have a conflict of interest with regards to the following topics:

• Green Anaconda (a species that the institution has a specimen of)
• Stanley Park (where the institution is located)

Alice could have a conflict of interest with regards to the following topics, depending on the edit:

• Ken Sim (mayor of the city the institution is in)
• Captive orca (controversial topic for which the institution has a controversial point of view)

As you edit, be mindful not only of your potential COI as an employee of an institution, but also of your connections with other people or entities who may be connected to what you're editing. A potential COI can arise even from unpaid connections, including your other volunteer work or unpaid academic writing. Declaring any connections upfront can help build trust with other editors.

Conflict of interest disclosures and edit requests

Any WiR should identify themselves and their employer on their user page. It can be helpful to announce your intentions on the talk page as well (this is especially important for pages where there may be a perceived or real conflict of interest).

If you are editing a page with which you have a COI, it is connected to your institution in any way, it is best to first make an edit request on the talk page and solicit feedback for your desired edits. You may need to ask for feedback elsewhere if the talk page is not active (where?). See Mary's rewrite of the Annual Reviews page via the talk page for a good example of how to do this.

On the English Wikipedia, you can use a template like Connected Contributor or Paid on the page's talk page. This will stay on the page, whereas a talk page discussion may be archived later.

Disclosing non-COI paid editing

(Let's discuss this!)

Consider a situation in which Alice is paid as a WiR to improve the article on the Green Anaconda. English Wikipedia policy does not require that she declare her paid WiR status on the Green Anaconda talk page (assuming she has declared her status on her own user page). However, doing so could be considered a best practice, especially if her edits are extensive or controversial.

It is not necessary or desirable for Alice to declare her paid WiR status on the talk page of every article to which she makes a minor, uncontroversial edit such as adding wikilinks.

It is not necessary or desirable for WiRs to use Edit Requests or Articles for Creation when they don't have a conflict of interest.

Using a Memorandum of Understanding to mitigate COI

(to discuss!)

If the WiR is not an employee of the host institution—for example, if they are externally funded by a local Wikimedia chapter or a WMF grant—they can sign a Memorandum of Understanding with their host outlining the editorial process and what the institution can and cannot ask of them. The MOU should make clear that they are not an employee, but the equivalent of a visiting scholar or an artist in residence. As such, they are free to work on articles that fulfil the agreed purpose of the residency, as approved by the funding agency. (The situation is much like that of a grant-funded artist in residence, who would be free to work on any artistic project without editorial interference from their hosts, even a project that was critical of the very institution that was hosting them.)

In the MOU the host agrees to provide space, access to the internet and their institutional library and resources, and the freedom to work with staff. The MOU needs to make clear that the Wikipedian has final editorial control of all writing, and will not be implementing suggestions or line edits from the host. Under these circumstances, it would even be possible to edit articles related to the institution's staff and programmes, as there is no professional or personal connection between the WiR and the host.