Following a previous reflection in French
, I would like to draw attention to a reflection at the beginning of a catchy title: Why not imagine a donation campaign in time rather than money ?
In 2013 a research named The Rise and Decline of an open collaboration system: How Wikipedia’s reaction to popularity is causing its decline.
attributes as a cause to the decrease in participation on Wikipedia :
- The good-faith newcomers are more likely to have their work rejected.
- Reverting tools are increasingly likely to revert the work of good-faith newcomers.
- These automated reverts exacerbate the negative effects of rejection on retention.
- Users of Huggle tend to not engage in the best practices for discussing reverts.
- The formalized process for vetting new policies and changes to policies ensures that newcomers' changes do not survive.
- Newcomers and other editors are moving increasingly toward less formal spaces.
But the one thing missing in this research is the possible correlation between the first use of MediaWiki Sitenotice for the fundraising
just before the sharp decline in participation of Wikipedia 5+ editors (see graph A). "This fundrazing held from 16 December 2006 to 15 January 2007"
and "has been [in this time] the most successful of our history by far, until now."
On 2010 a economic research named Dons en temps, dons en argent (Gift in time, gift in money)
based on a national Canadian survey on donation made precisely on 2007, highlights that "A relatively high probability (0.354) is observed that the reference person is a donor but not a volunteer".
This information is an argument in favor of a probable correlation between a start of donation campaign with site-notice and the beginning of the participation and retention decline of small contributors. This situation for contributors has not changed since the beginning of 2007 (graph B), while profits linked to the site-notice campaign have continued to increase (graph C).
The community growth space could probably spend time to evaluate this first analysis, think about how to consolidate it.
In a second step, it would also be possible to think about future actions that would take into account a likely influence between the donation of money and the donation of time.
As an innovation for reduced inequalities related to wealth of donors and for bringing justice and sustain on Wikimedia community, why not launching a time donation campaign ?
This idea and topic seam connected to the community growth.
- evaluation of a correlation between site-notice fundraising and decline of participation an retention on Wikipedia.
- discussing about conduct a more in-depth study about this first analyze
- think about future actions that would take into account a likely influence between the donation of money and the donation of time.
The type of this session could be at least a Lightning talk, at most a Roundtable discussion forum.
- Room: round-table seating.
- Audience: No requirement on number, knowledge or skill for attend/participate.
- Recording: This session is appropriate for filming by a single mobile camera, sharable on the internet, with a free-licence.
- Time requested: Between 10 to 50 minutes depending the type of session and the numerous of attendees
Relationship with the organizers of the space[edit | edit source]
Constructive suggestions from the organizer team are welcome
- I would be interested in receiving help in shaping my submission: YES
- In particular, I would need the following type of help or advice:Choosing the type of session.
- I consent to the organizers of the space contacting me to discuss alternative ways to present my knowledge (for example, merging two proposals into a common presentation, a panel debate instead of a lightning talk, etc.), or ways to modify and improve my proposal (for example by ensuring a gender diversity on panels) : YES
- If my proposal is not selected for a presentation, I would be interested in presenting my proposal in the form of a poster in the Community Growth space: YES
- I consent to my proposal being proposed to organizers of other spaces if it would be a good cross-over topic or if it fits better into the other space's scope: YES