Growth/Communities/How to interact with newcomers/en

The following guide has been created to help experienced users on Wikimedia wikis on how to interact with new users, especially on help desks or on Question-and-Answer (Q&A) pages.

This document gathers best practices from various websites (Wikimedia wikis, other Q&A websites...) and thoughts from Wikimedia experienced users who interact with newcomers. You can learn more about those findings on Phabricator.

How to have successful interactions

 * Always be friendly, polite and patient. Even if the newcomer forgets about that.


 * Start your reply by saying "hello and welcome!"


 * Be sure that you understand the question asked. Don't try to guess what is the problem. Asking for clarifications may be appropriate, they may help you provide a more accurate answer.


 * Check which editor the newcomer uses (wikitext, visual, mobile...), and provide a reply for that editor. Ask the user to use an editor they don't know will be a burden for them.


 * Know your limits: sometimes you won't know how to reply, especially in areas that are technical or out of your favorite topics. Feel free to ask for help from other users who are more experienced in certain areas.


 * Be honest: if the request is not realistic or doable on your wiki, or generally off-topic, say so and explain why. For example, it may not be productive for the newcomer to work on content that may be deleted in only a few days. But explaining why the content can be deleted can help the newcomer to avoid future problems. Invite the newcomer to work on something else instead.


 * Newcomers may be angry or frustrated at your wiki because of a variety of reasons. Their complaints are not against you personally. Keep calm and try to understand their situation.


 * If it becomes clear that the discussion is going nowhere, close it politely.


 * Have fun! Don't approach helping newcomers as a burden. If you don't have time to follow through with a request, or just aren't in the mood, then let another helper handle the request instead.

How to build good replies

 * Leave replies that tell the person what to do next. Don't just say hello.


 * Don't point to documentation first, explain the process instead. An answer is better than link to the answer. Quote important information from other pages you link. It avoids forcing people to read many long pages.


 * Reply to questions asked, because they are specific - avoid general replies. Provide examples.


 * Keep things simple, avoid jargon and acronyms. You can introduce it progressively by linking to it. Avoid overloading the newcomer with information not related to their question.


 * Be a guide. For instance, someone asks how to add an image on a new article, but the action that person should take first is to add sources. Tell them to add sources first (and how to) and promise that you will explain how to add an image later.


 * Pay attention to how you reply, check your spelling.


 * Make sure the newcomer is aware of the reply, by any method. If possible, follow up on the request by checking back later: the newcomer may ask about something else, or need further clarification. Newcomers may reply in an unexpected way, while they may not understand how to reply, how to add their signature or how to ping a user.


 * If possible, respond in a reasonable time. Newcomers many not log in often or may not have email notifications enabled. They may not be accustomed to a community like Wikimedia, where discussions can sometimes involve users from many time zones. Check back in the forum occasionally for any questions that have gone unanswered for 24 hours.


 * When you explain something, ask the newcomer if your answer has helped them. The newcomer will feel more welcomed and you will get some information to improve your experience. If the conversation ends, remind to the newcomer that you're still available if needed.

Explain, or do the change myself?
One of the goals is to help newcomers who struggle with the interface or markup. It may sometimes be easier to make very complicated edits yourself instead of explaining how to do so. That's the case for multi-step processes and complex wiki-syntax. Be honest and tell the newcomer that it is a complicated edit "even for an experienced user". But explain the steps you've been through so they can learn and reproduce them afterwards.

Make your choice based on your own experience and your discussions with other helpers. But it is often more rewarding for a newcomer to understand what to do and apply it themselves, rather than having it done for them. Teaching is less efficient in the short-term, but increases editor-retention in the long-term.

Rely on others community members
Operating a dedicated help forum is a collective project. It depends on a wide range of helpers. Each have their individual strengths and weaknesses, as well as available time and energy.

Coordinate with other helpers to share your experience and best practices. Be open to advice from other helpers when they offer it.

Take care of the other people who reply with you. Thank and guide people who try to help. Thank people who help a lot.

Don't forget to keep the community informed of your efforts, it will help to recruit new helpers.

Examples
Here are some hypothetical examples based on common replies found on several Wikipedias.

How can I add an image I have on my computer to an article?


 * ❌ Check on the help page where you will be guided.
 * ✅ Hello! Wikipedia can be reused by anyone. We respect copyright laws, so we can't accept every image on Wikipedia. It depends on the topic, and also on who has created that image. Which article do you want to illustrate? Are you the author of the image you want to use? Thank you!

My article has been deleted and that's scandalous!


 * ❌ That's your fault: you should have read the help pages first. Now you know that you can't do everything you want on Wikipedia, especially trying to promote the topic you've chosen.
 * ✅ Hello and sorry for the bad experience you had. Based on the information available, it seems that your article didn't include any sources. Wikipedia articles are based on published sources, so that readers can verify the information. That's the most important issue. I've tried to check if some sources exist about the topic you've chosen and I haven't found any. Do you have sources we can use? If there are no such sources available, then it may be too soon for Wikipedia to have an article on this subject.