What happens if a mentor removes themselves from the list (if they for some reasons don't want to continue being a mentor)? Will the newcomer get a new mentor automatically (and if so, will they be notified)?
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Reply to "Mentor that quits?"
Thank you both, Marshall and Benoît, you are extremely helpful, as always
Hopefully I will have some thoughts about the structured tasks from the conference attendees right away; and of course it can be discussed onwiki later.
A late update from me: I used the suggested media, and the session went ok
Here are my findings and questions:
Reply to "Stats and trends of ukwiki"
Reply to "Who is the newcomers's mentor?"
Reply to "Survey Results Regarding the Newcomers' Features in the Hebrew Wikipedia"
Reply to "Newcomer's Features- Issues and Suggestions"
Reply to "Translation from translatewiki.net"
Reply to "Language screenshots"
Reply to "request for deployment of growth prototype on clinicianwiki.com"
Reply to "Team name in other languages"
About this board
Discussion related to the old Growth team is archived at Talk:Growth/Growth 2014.
Mentor that quits?
Once a user has been assigned a mentor, they keep that mentor even if the mentor removes themselves from the active mentor list.
The workaround is to use Special:ClaimMentee. It can be used by any other mentor who monitors the retired mentor's talk page so that they can empty the list of active newcomers for this retired mentor.
We are working on plans about scaling and improving tools for mentors. In your opinion, what would be the ideal solution for this situation? :)
Thanks for the answer.
One simple idea that we got was just to randomly assign a new mentor and then give a notification to the newcomer what has happened.
Stats and trends of ukwiki
Hi, @Trizek (WMF), @MMiller (WMF), I'm working on a presentation for the Ukrainian WikiConference about the Growth initiatives, particularly, Newcomer homepage. Can you please guide me to where I can find the numbers and findings about it that exist for ukwiki? Thanks a lot.
Hi @Ата -- I'm glad to hear that you will be presenting about the Growth features! We think the Growth features are going well, and there is a lot of good news to talk about. We also would be eager to hear what your community members think about them so far. I can generate some numbers and graphs about Ukrainian Wikipedia next week. Is that okay? Here are some questions we have for you:
- The graphs that I want to make are like this one and this one, showing numbers of edits over time and numbers of editors over time. There are a lot of wikis on those graphs, and perhaps it would be easier to show them if we only have a small number of wikis to compare with Ukrainian. Are there some wikis on the list that you think would make the most interesting comparisons?
- Do you need any other help with your presentation? @Trizek (WMF) and I have many slides and pictures. We could also help you learn about our team's future plans, specifically around "structured tasks".
Let us know!
@MMiller (WMF), If you can generate some numbers and graphs about Ukrainian Wikipedia next week, it will be awesome! I assume that cswiki, huwiki, plwiki, and possibly svwiki might be interesting for comparison. I also asked some users what that would like to hear in the presentation, and here are some points:
- Are mentors being monitored by someone? Is the mentor—mentee conversation being moderated by someone else, and if not, should it be? (My answer: no, they aren't and it isn't; but I saw mentors supplementing additional details when the already given answer from another mentor doesn't seem well. I assume that the question derives from fear of some self-proclaimed mentors not being experienced and humble enough, which says something about the community and not the Growth features themselves.)
- What are the best cases of mentoring? (My answer: I have noticed some imho very nice instances and would like to talk to some mentors next week.)
- How do mentors like the process? (I guess, one would have to ask the all for that.)
- How do mentees like the suggested edits, was there any survey?
- What are the quality of their edits, are they any good?
I am currently looking through the subpages here and presentations on Commons (like this one) and I will gladly receive any suggestions about what findings and future plans you would like me to underline during the 45 minutes that I will have next Sunday :) My email is vira.motorko at gmail.com in case you need it.
I can reply to some of the questions :
- About mentoring mentors: the list of mentors is public and talk pages are public as well. It is up to anyone to monitor their activity, as other people monitor what's going on on talk pages. Lists of mentors are usually protected so that not everyone can add their name there. And of course, it is frequent to see other people adding extra information to a mentor reply.
- About best cases of mentoring, I would be curious to have examples since this is not something we particularly monitor.
- About mentors liking the process, it is important to keep in mind that we (as the whole WMF) mostly receive messages about things that don't work. :) I never had the chance to have a direct feedback from a mentor telling me that they like very much the process. I got a few pieces of feedback related to people disliking the process, mostly about the quality of questions received by mentors. However, this is subjective: some people we complaining because they didn't get actual questions but just greetings. Also some rare mentors were complaining about the quality of questions. An evaluation about the quality of messages has been conduced on French Wikipedia and Portuguese Wikipedia. And it appears that the majority of questions received are aligned with Wikipedia's scope, and even if they are not questions, they provide actionable feedback.
- About knowing if mentees like the suggested edits, we haven't surveyed them. But data seems to prove that they appreciate them since the number of edits they make during their first couple of weeks on the wiki significantly increases (+85,6%). Regarding quality, we mesure it by the number of reverts, and the quality of edits made using our tools is comparable to that of a control group. However, our tools haven't measured the overall quality, that would need humans to compare edits.
As Marshall mentioned, our next big step is Structured tasks. Our first tool is about adding links to the articles, and we will test it on our pilot wikis as a prototype. The slides at the end of this presentation would give you a good overview of our project (even if they are just mockups). The tool would be based on a yes/no/not sure system, to guide newcomers understanding what is a good link, and to help improving connexions between different concepts. The yes/no/not sure system would allow them to focus on understanding concepts first without the obligation to understand how to edit (even if they still can edit if they wish to).
Let us know if you need more information!
@Ата -- I've made some graphs that may be useful to you. The first two show the number of distinct users completing suggested edits each work during 2020, and the second two show the number of edits completed.
Two additional numbers that may be interesting are:
- 476 mentorship questions have been asked by 379 users in Ukrainian Wikipedia
- 275 help panel questions have been asked by 208 users in Ukrainian Wikipedia
Regarding whether mentees like the suggested edits, we asked newcomers on Arabic, Czech, Korean, and Vietnamese about their experiences by posting questions on their talk pages. These questions went to newcomers who have been doing a lot of suggested edits, so we would expect their responses to be positive (otherwise they would have not done so many suggested edits). Many of them say that suggested edits helps them find interesting things to work on, that they like to choose topics of interest to narrow the articles down to certain areas, and that the feature has helped them learn editing policies and rules. We've also seen that some users do a few suggested edits and then move on to other kinds of edits, like translating articles. Other users just continue to do hundreds of suggested edits day after day.
In terms of a best case of mentoring, one story comes to mind from Vietnamese Wikipedia in which a mentee has since grown their involvement and is now a mentor.
I hope this information is helpful, and please stay in touch with any other needs. We want to hear how the session goes!
Thank you both, Marshall and Benoît, you are extremely helpful, as always
Thank you Ата. We thank you as well, since you continuously take care of the experiments on Ukrainian Wikipedia! :)
This brand new page may also interest you as well: Growth/Results.
A late update from me: I used the suggested media, and the session went ok
- The mentors have a need to know better what newcomers see and to share best practices of having conversations with them – it will be good to have an extended talk about this separately.
- How do newcomers know that their question on the help desk or on the mentors talk page got answered? I stressed the importance of pinging users – and also people suggest that these notifications were more prominent, maybe even in a form of another block on the homepage, or as an additional bell icon next to the mentor's name (look! they answered you!).
- In the suggested edit module, – in Ready? Click "Edit" to get started. – the word Edit might be a link to the action=edit, or be in some other way more suggestive about where to actually click. (As far as I remember there is this blue dot that suggests clicking? does it work here? I wasn't sure.)
- Is it possible to switch Extension:GrowthExperiments on a non-Wikimedia wiki?
- Can a mentor mark themselves as away yet? will a newbie be automatically switched from a mentor who haven't logged in for a while to another mentor?
- One experienced mentor reminded us that newcomers' questions may be sorted out in recent edits, and by looking for recent versions mentors can find questions, unanswered by others.
There was no particular feedback on structured edits.
Thank you for your report! It is really appreciated.
- Mentors can discover a newcomer typical experience by creating a new account. Concerning mentors, I don't know if you know that we have a training for them.
- Newcomers know that their question has been answered when (and if) they are pinged. Like you said, pinging is a must-have on a reply. This idea of having a notification on the homepage is something that should be considered. Thank you for passing this along!
- There is always a blinking blue spot highlighting the "edit" button.
- It is possible to deploy the extension to any Mediawiki wiki that has the right configuration. But we won't support any suggestions coming from third party wikis.
- It is not yet possible for a mentor to say they are away. Please add any context concerning this question to T227876 if you can.
- Great reminder. Has it lead to people suggesting to take care about questions left by other mentors? Are mentors cooperating on your wiki?
Let me know if you need more details about anything! :)
@Ата -- thank you for the notes about your meeting. It is always good to hear these sorts of thoughts and ideas. I have a couple more notes to add:
- I suspect that newcomers who don't find out that their question has been answered is one of the biggest problems with the mentorship workflow. I think that many newcomers may expect an answer in seconds or minutes, instead of hours or days, and so once they don't receive an answer, they close the window and don't come back. Many of them also don't register with an email address, and so unless they go back to the wiki to look for their notifications, they may not find out that they have received a response even if they have been pinged. I think some ideas to address this include (a) introducing some sort of live chat so that newcomers don't have to wait for a response, (b) encouraging more newcomers to register with an email address when they create their account, (c) maybe one day integrating with a chat app so that newcomers could get pinged to their phone.
- About making the word Edit into a link to action=edit: this is actually something we discussed when building the feature. The reason we didn't want a link there is because part of the point of suggested edits is to teach newcomers to edit on their own. Therefore, we want them to know that they have to click "Edit" at the top, so we don't want to give them a confusing shortcut when they're being guided. So instead, we apply the blue dot.
Who is the newcomers's mentor?
There is a problem that the is not synchronized with the mentor list in any way. And I, with a cursory glance, could not find how to do it. Is there an API that allows you to see who the mentor of a particular newcomers is?
I think a word is missing in the first part of your message. :)
> Is there an API that allows you to see who the mentor of a particular newcomers is?
No. Could you describe what would be the outcome of it? What is the need for mentors?
Hello :)) Yes, “Hello template” is missing :) I want to synchronise this template with mentors list.
It seems that it is a popular request. See https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T233250 for details! :)
Survey Results Regarding the Newcomers' Features in the Hebrew Wikipedia
Hello. I had recently made a Survey among Hebrew Wikipedia's users regarding the Newcomers' Features, which was active for about a month (October 14th-November 7th). I would like to share here important results, notes and suggestions from this survey, which will hopefully help in the future development of the features for all of the relevant Wikipedias in general, and the Hebrew Wikipedia in particular. 22 people responded, most of them (except for 5-6) were experienced users, so this should also be considered when seeing the results.
(most of the questions were in a scale from 1-5. 1= not at all, 5=very much)
*When being asked about how much the users are satisfied from the features, most of the users chose 4 and 5 (out of 22, 6 users chose 5 and 7 users chose 4). Therefore, the users are overall satisfied with the features.
*When being asked how much they would like the features to stay in the Hebrew Wikipedia for the future, most of the users chose 5- 11 users out of 22 (so they indeed want the features to stay).
*When being asked how much they would like the features to be available as default for both new and experienced users, most of the users chose 4 and 5 (7 users chose 4, 5 users chose 5 while 4 users chose 3, 2 users chose 2, and 4 users chose 1). Therefore, there is a will among the users to see the features for both new and experienced users as default in the future (however, I also explained later that it's just an option that may be available for the future, and not something to be done soon).
*When asking users who were/are mentors regarding their satisfaction from the mentorship, most of the users chose 3 (5 out of 14), while 4 users chose 4 and 4 users chose 1 (and another user chose 2), so there isn't enough satisfaction from the mentorship.
I got a few more encouraging results about liking the newcomers' homepage (out of 8 users, 7 users chose answers 4 and 5), users being satisfied with the module of suggested edits (out of 5 users, 4 chose answers 4 and 5), or users being satisfied with the help panel (out of 4 users, 4 chose answers 4 and 5), but sadly only few users answered there, so I don't think it can represent enough users to use as a collective answer from our community.
In addition, I would also like to mention a few notes and suggestions that were raised in said survey:
*Users didn't like the random matching of mentees (I explained the reason for such thing, however, and that helping users with basic questions is not as same as a mandatory mentorship and thus personal matching of mentors is not critical for this kind of mentorship. I also offered to tag specific people if they are needed, and to use templates we have to tag experts in various subjects).
*Mentors are unable to know who their mentees are and their contributions (was mentioned quite a lot, before the survey and in it. I mentioned that such thing is in the Phabricator and in development, but this emphasises the need and the importance of such tools).
*It was reported that new users don't answer after they questions were answered (and it even seemed many didn't continue in Wikipedia after that). I wrote about the importance of tagging users, but it's not necessarily the factor here and probably also happened with tagged users.
*Users asked for more subjects in the suggested edits module (and to separate subjects: to separate "Philosophy and Religion" to two separate subjects, and separate the different religions into different subjects instead of putting them all into one). My personal recommendation in this case would be using our portals (hubs, "main pages" for specific subjects) for listing subjects in this module.
*Users suggested to use flow pages (or even mail) for the discussions with the mentees that should be in experienced users' talk pages in order not to overload talk pages, helping the mentees to find the page to talk with their mentors, and to help them not to struggle with WikiCode.
Thanks and sorry for the long message. Hope this will be helpful, and will improve the experience of the features.
Thank you for your message. This survey is a great initiative, and we are happy that you shared the results with us. :)
the results are indeed helpful. First, it shows that people seem to be overall happy about the features.
Concerning notes and suggestions, I have some replies for you that may help mentors.
If a mentor wants to collaborate with a given newcomer, it is possible to claim a mentee. This is useful if you find someone who like editing on the same topic as yours, or if you host a workshop IRL and want to follow up on wikis the people you met.
Mentors wanting to know who are their mentees is covered by a few tickets on Phabricator. I invite you to look at these tickets, since you may find things about having a mentor dashboard, or a filter in recent changes and watchlist just showing your mentees' edits. Your survey gives some wright to these ideas. Please leave comments there with the feedback you received in your survey.
New users not responding is not a surprise to me. As a volunteer, I'm a mentor since 10 years on French Wikipedia, and some newcomers come back after a while. I recently had the case of a user responding after 3 months of absence! It seems to be a lot of time for people like us, active every day on the wikis, but for people who aren't wikiholdics like we are, it is a normal span of time.
For talk pages, maybe you should ask to have the reply tool being deployed to everyone by default on your wiki? It would ease replies from newcomers.
I let @MMiller (WMF) comment as well. :)
thank you again for sharing!
Thanks! :) I will indeed comment in the phabricator regarding showing mentees and their activity to their mentors.
I was a bit surprised to hear that newcomers come back after such a long time and respond, but it definitely sounds right. Hopefully more and more newcomers will return in the future in this manner.
As for deploying the flow tool as default for the Hebrew Wikipedia- I guess I can raise this topic there and see what the community thinks about it, although I personally prefer the regular talk pages over it.
My personal experience on fr.wp is a response time from newcomers of 2-3 days OR around 15 days. This is also something to consider if one has an archiving system on their talk page: don't archive too early!
Structured Discussions (Flow) will not be deployed by default on any wiki. This tool will be abandoned when the new talk pages system will be ready.
Thanks, I will point this out to the mentors in our wiki.
I'm really sorry for confusing between flow and the reply tool (didn't know there was such tool and accidentally thought it's flow). I hope the discussion there will continue now considering said reply tool. By the way, there was another tool that was suggested previously in this discussion, which is quite similar to the reply tool ,but has more options and is a bit better I think. AFAIK it's called "Convenient Discussions" ("דיונים נוחים"), and it's not avaliable in our wiki through beta, but by adding this line to common.js:
I tried it and it's not perfect but overall fine. Many editors who responded previously favoured it over the reply tool and flow. Therefore, I think it may be another good alternative, and suggested it as an option too.
No problem on the confusion. Like I wrote, it happen quite often.
Concerning Convenient Discussions, it is a script. If I remember correctly, this script is loaded for each talk page you visit. But the new reply tool (כלי שיחה) works when asked to. It is lighter and the interface is similar to other tools. the reply tool would be a much better experience for newcomers.
However, I'm not currently working on discussion tools. I informed my colleague WhatamIgoing about the conversation you have on your wiki.
Newcomer's Features- Issues and Suggestions
Hello. I'm from the Hebrew Wikipedia and I helped in deploying the Growth's newcomer features to the Hebrew Wikipedia, which have been recently deployed to our wiki. I just wanted to point out several suggestions and issues that were raised from our Wikipedia, in hope they will be solved, and therefore it will be easier for us to promote the features for frequent usage (and hopefully to set them as default in the future):
-It was suggested that the features should also suggest to new users to write new articles that don't currently exist (the ideas for such articles can be taken from lists we have in our various wikipedia's portals). I suggest that such edits can be suggested to users who choose the "hard" difficulty level of edits in the newcomers' suggested edits.
-It was asked that the blue button on the left side will not have a question mark on it. Although I personally don't think it's problematic, I would like to hear what is your opinion in this manner. Maybe it is better using something else instead?
-If the features are applied as default, will the homepage for newcomers be applied as default to every user (including the experienced ones), or only to these who register since then? The problem is that if it's applied to anyone, many users who don't really need mentors will have to manually remove the random mentor which was assigned to them (because they don't need one), which is quite an inconvenience to say the least.
Hello @המקיסט -- thank you so much for helping deploy these features to your wiki and for communicating about them with your community. So far, there have been 298 suggested edits from 39 users! There have also been 106 mentor questions and 33 help panel questions.
I also heard about some community thoughts from @Aaharoni-WMF, so I'm tagging him here in case he wants to weigh in.
"It was suggested that the features should also suggest to new users to write new articles that don't currently exist (the ideas for such articles can be taken from lists we have in our various wikipedia's portals). I suggest that such edits can be suggested to users who choose the "hard" difficulty level of edits in the newcomers' suggested edits."
- It's interesting to hear you say this, because we have always thought about it the other way around. Usually, it seems like many newcomers want to create new articles, but they fail either because they don't understand the technology or don't understand policies. And so our features try to encourage newcomers to try easier edits first before they create new articles. How are you thinking about this? Is your wiki comfortable with newcomers creating new articles? Or maybe only after they've accomplished some easier edits?
"It was asked that the blue button on the left side will not have a question mark on it. Although I personally don't think it's problematic, I would like to hear what is your opinion in this manner. Maybe it is better using something else instead?"
- In general, when we design a feature, we actually try to design it in similar ways that other kinds of software do it. The reason is that people on the internet get used to certain symbols meaning certain things. Then when they see those symbols in our products, they automatically know what they mean instead of having to learn a new symbol. A common example is using an "X" to close a window. That's why we use the question mark -- we think people already know that the question mark means "help". Does that make sense?
"If the features are applied as default, will the homepage for newcomers be applied as default to every user (including the experienced ones), or only to these who register since then? The problem is that if it's applied to anyone, many users who don't really need mentors will have to manually remove the random mentor which was assigned to them (because they don't need one), which is quite an inconvenience to say the least."
- The way the features work right now is that all new accounts created on Hebrew Wikipedia since the deployment date have an 80% to receive the features. The other 20% are in our "control group", meaning that we compare the work of the 80% to the 20% to see if the Growth features have impact. So as time goes on, more and more users will have the features available, and will hopefully be used to them. Many experienced editors have asked us to adapt the homepage to be more useful for their work. That's certainly something that's possible in the future, but it's just that the Growth team's goal is to focus on newcomers for now. Regarding the mentors -- why do you say that experienced users would have to remove the mentor? If the user doesn't intend to ask any mentor questions, they can just leave the mentorship module alone, and choose not to ask any questions.
Let me now what you think!
About lists of articles in portals:
There are a couple of issues here:
- To begin with, it's not necessary about article creation. Portals at the Hebrew Wikipedia also include lists of articles to improve, sometimes manually curated, and sometimes as a link to a category of stubs on the topic. The bigger issue is how can they be connected to the product you are developing. Or, to generalize it even more: How can wiki editors —in any wiki, not just in Hebrew— directly influence the topics and the suggested articles in them. If I understand correctly, they are currently built by analyzing WikiProject templates in the English Wikipedia, processing it with some algorithms, and applying the results to other languages. While this produces reasonable results from what I've seen, it's quite different from the usual way in which wiki editors work: They are used to influencing things directly by editing wiki pages and seeing the results applied immediately in lists or categories. The current technology has several layers that remove the topics from the editors' control. So it's not specifically about portals, but more about having a way to control things directly.
- Talking about article creation, the Hebrew Wikipedia is not substantially different from English in this regard. Some articles created by new editors are good, and some are not so good. The English Wikipedia is simply much larger, and has much more new article creation, and primarily because of that it has stricter rules and technical limitations about that.
About the question mark icon:
Indeed, one user said this, and indeed, there are many other sites that do this. We are just passing the message. That user said that he doesn't like this icon because it is used on other websites, and on other websites it's often ineffective. I don't know if there are many other people who think like he does, but he may have a point: by itself, the fact that it's used on many other sites and apps doesn't mean that it's good and effective. Other than saying that, I trust the Growth designers and the design researchers to make good choices here.
As for the adaptation of the homepage, I'm happy to hear that it applies to more and more users by default. Indeed, there are experienced users who want to use the homepage also in our wiki. However, many experienced users preferred to remove the mentor and just try the experience of the homepage.
Translation from translatewiki.net
@Trizek (WMF), hi:) How often is the translation from the translatewiki.net updated?
Once a week, with the deployment train as announced on Tech News (on Thursdays for your wiki).
In the meantime, you can override some messages locally, but don't forget to remove them when the translation is available!
Yes, I know that, but I haven't received translations for the second week.
Hi, I asked @RHo (WMF), but she isn't answer me:) What font do you use for your logo?
Hi, I found such a cool thing, maybe we can use it for project documentation? mw:Language_screenshots.
This is indeed a cool thing. When it works. :/
xD I hope someday there is someone who will support it :)
request for deployment of growth prototype on clinicianwiki.com
Hi I am the founder of clinicianwiki.com. This is a really exciting project and I am happy to help with testing of the prototype on clinicianwiki.com
Hi @Timingliu -- thank you for getting in touch and congratulations on founding a new wiki! We agree that the Growth features have the potential to help non-Wikimedia wikis, and you are welcome to install them on your wiki. Our team is able to answer questions, but we won't be able to manage the process or alter the software to better fit non-Wikimedia wikis. Does that sound okay?
Hi @MMiller (WMF) thanks for replying! How can I install the growth features on my wiki?
Hi @Timingliu -- this is the page that explains about the GrowthExperiments extension and how to install it: Extension:GrowthExperiments. If you have questions, the fastest place to ask is at the support desk: Project:Support desk. Or if the questions are specific to Growth functionality, you can also ask here.
Team name in other languages
Do I need to translate the name of the team to other language? And if so, what is the exact meaning of the word "growth"? :)
Thank you for this question!
You can translate the name in Russian if you think it should be translated. It really depends on your community's best practices, and also on how the features are perceived. If your translation focuses on the project of growing up communities, maybe a translation would be better. If your translation focuses on the team's name, maybe it shouldn't be translated since it is a proper noun, defined in English language. Honestly, it is up to you! :)
Concerning the meaning, they are defined by the team's goals and objective, in short increase retention of new contributors. We are trying to see wikis growing up, by reducing the difficulties they may face during their first steps.
I hope this helps you to better understanding the meaning of Growth!
Are you considering to have these features deployed on your wiki?
@Trizek (WMF), thanks for the detailed answer! :) I will think about it.
> Are you considering to have these features deployed on your wiki?