Draft talk:Archive/2024/WikiService

Name for this project
"better name for the project" <-- Maybe something like "School of Wiki Participation". --JWS 13:44, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah I though of "WikiStandards" last night, so it's like a level based thing and users can be qualified to do a certain set of things or whatever. Any more input is welcome then we can weigh up some more options --Pumpmeup 01:54, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Well I went ahead and moved it all. What I really envisage for this project is level based learning where the amount of effort you put in equates to easily recognizable awards. Eventually this would become a kind of thing where users that have completed a certain level can be trusted with matters involving wiki-subjects they have learned. e.g:


 * Scenario 1:
 * User:John Doe spots a suspected copyrighted image that has license terms he doesn't understand. He looks in Category:Level 4 Users (or whatever) and finds User:Jane Doe (who has the appropriate template on their user page with a verify button), and asks her. Jane, having of course studied the appropriate copyright course material during her studies, advises John what to do.


 * Scenario 2
 * User:Jane Bloggs is going around welcoming new users. She comes across User:Joe Bloggs, who has the Level 3 template on their userpage, and it is verified OK. She gives a special message, telling him places he can help out on the particular wiki.


 * Scenario 3
 * User:Jane Bloggs has just met a user whose opinions regarding controversial content clash. The other user is verified Level 5. Jane decides to not discount the user's opinion, and to pay attention to all his complicated reasoning - they are obviously dedicated and know their stuff.

Yeah. Eventually I will get round to writing a mission statement that everyone can contribute to then we can finalize and stick to it as a guide for the project. This is why I've fallen in love with Wikiversity- theres no rigid protocols and no a**holes to kill you every time you do something your way as on Wikipedia. --Pumpmeup 02:33, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia has a very narrow mission: make encyclopedia articles. In some sense, there should be a fairly narrow range of options available for Wikipedia participants....I suspect there are not all that many good ways to use wiki technology to make an encyclopedia....and if you want to have Wikipedia be a "showcase" for wiki success, you just need to pick one approach and get on with the task. At Wikiversity we can be more experimental. There might be a very large number of good strategies for using wiki to facilitate online learning, and Wikiversity is open to all of them. But here at the start, most people in the world do not see wiki technology as a general-purpose tool for learning. We do need to construct some "proofs of concept". Back when Wikiversity was being planned, I argued that a good starting strategy would be to provide "service courses" to Wikipedia. I still think this is a good approach. --JWSchmidt 03:02, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree wholeheartedly. One aspect that I'd really like to emphasize aside from useful course content is creating a structure of formal (within Wikimedia) qualification (in a sense), that will actually be known by many users. JWS, if theres anything in this school you want to change (names, wording, etc) please do --Pumpmeup 03:58, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Yay! I think I derived the perfect name: School:WikiService. Perfecto! I will change it when I get home tonight. I guess it has been renamed a lot, but hey it helps with the ol' editcountitis ;-). Still anyone with better suggestions go ahead and change it (be sure to check Category:WikiStandards) or just sugest it here. --Pumpmeup 05:48, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I like the name WikiService as well, it captures what the project is about: "service" for a greater community good. Love the idea as well and keen to help out. Countrymike 23:51, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Formal qualification
"a structure of formal (within Wikimedia) qualification (in a sense)" <-- I think it is only gradually, over a long period of time, that this type of educational resource will gain recognition as being useful within the Wikimedia community....and it will take a lot of work here at Wikiversity to achieve that. Any mark of "formal qualification" that arises from this project will initially only be relevant within this project. If the "graduates" can successfully go out into the Wikimedia community and perform useful tasks and not cause problems, then the Wikimedia community will slowly come to trust this project. There will never be a day when Jimbo or any other "voice from above" decrees that the "graduates" have earned some kind of official status within the Wikimedia community. This is implicit in how Wikiversity was created as a Wikimedia project....the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees decided that Wikiversity (since it is an open wiki) cannot have any kind of system of formal certification or accreditation. As an open community, all we have is volunteers with an edit history. If a user account has a history of good constructive edits, then other editors will slowly come to trust that account. It takes time to establish that kind of trust and it is very easy to mess up, do something that disrupts the mission of a project, and destroy that trust. So all that can be hoped for is that some years from now, many people in the Wikimedia community will respect the work of editors who have "graduated" from this school and when they notice clueless editors having a problem, they will suggest that newbies come to Wikiversity to learn how to do basic useful tasks in a wiki community.--JWS 15:10, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Ranks
This project has some virtue, but the use of police ranks is appalling. It would be much more appropriate to grade the progress through the modules in the way a university does. The ranks should be removed immediately. I also note the related page on the English Wikipedia is proposed for deletion and the military-like ranks are one reason. --Bduke 03:13, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think anyone is wild about the prospect of using military-style ranks. There has also been some IRC discussion of the fact that some people like structured learning while other people do not. Potentially there could be several tracks with different approaches to helping people learn about participating in wiki-based projects. For people who do enjoy structure and step-by-step rewards, what might be a good approach? "the way a university does" <-- in most cases this means grades. How would that work at Wikiversity? Another alternative would be to use some kind of "portfolio system". The tangible unit of activity at a wiki is the edit. Wikiversity has a "learn by editing" approach. People could complete tasks such as "categorize 10 uncategorized pages" and document those tasks with difs in their portfolio. --JWSchmidt 03:29, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * First, I note that the English Wikipedia page has been speedy deleted. Second, I suppose the best university approach would be a transcript on the users userpage listing the modules they have completed. However, I remain unconvinced that we need this formalized approach anyway. I am fairly sure it will not ever fly on the English Wikipedia, but it might I suppose have some uses here. I just do not know enough about wikiversity yet. --Bduke 11:00, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Geez, I hate them myself. Please CHANGE IT! Or else I will --Pumpmeup 04:13, 27 October 2007 (UTC)


 * It seems like this is probably moving towards there being a system of userboxes that would say things like, "I like to help categorize pages. How's my work? See my portfolio which lists the 374 pages I have helped to categorize." In addition, there could be a system of "requests for comments". An editor could ask the community to evaluate their skill at some task such as categorizing pages. That editor could then provide links from their portfolio to their "requests for comments". Of course, if the community does not like someone's editing and there is a call for community comments, the record of those comments (even if negative) would have to be included in the portfolio. --JWS 15:09, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

User names
I'm not sure what to call graduates: qualified gnomes? WikiOfficers? Any input appreciated --Pumpmeup 05:43, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I suggested (in the section above) that there could be a system involving a formal record of an editor's edit history contained in an editor's portfolio, userboxes and "requests for comments". I guess the question is, would there be something special for when someone has had a positive outcome from "requests for comments" on every skill covered by the "School of WikiService"? There could be one final "request for comments" in which the community reviews an editor's entire edit history and makes sure that their portfolio, userboxes and record of positive "requests for comments" is in order. The history of such a "graduates' RFC page" would be a record of the "graduates of the School of WikiService". I suppose people could call themselves "graduates of the School of WikiService" if they have on record such a community-based evaluation of their editing history. I'm having a hard time imagining that there needs to be a special name for "a graduate of the School of WikiService". --JWS 15:24, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Seriously, JWS, you kick my ass at good ideas - so please implement them as you see fit, my master almighty. Your humble servant, --Pumpmeup 15:54, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

content development project
I started formatting the project as a Wikiversity content development project. Subpages of the main school page can be used for pages such as School:WikiService/Particpants. I think each "module" or "level" should eventually have its own page in the topic namespace. All actual learning resources go in the main namespace. --JWS 16:03, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks - I will keep that in mind - for now the few pages are really just demo framework --Pumpmeup 16:06, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Discussion taking place on Requests for Deletion

 * See Requests_for_Deletion (aka RFD). If that discussion is underway, you are more than welcome to place long comments here and link to them from the RFD page.--Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 15:42, 7 March 2024 (UTC)