Hi Phoebezz22! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
Hi Phoebezz22! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
Hi Phoebezz22! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
Hello Phoebezz22, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Happy editing, Abishe (talk) 21:55, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Infoadder95 Of course! Interview study uses interview as a method to understand participants' experience. Interviews are a method to learn about users. In our case, I will be asking pre-determined questions and you will answer them with your experience in Wikipedia. Follow-up or clarification questions may also asked. I hope this helps! Phoebezz22 (talk) 19:48, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Phoebezz22 Thanks for clarification, you have chosen a right participant for your interview, I have just one more question left is this interview going to be physical or if it is online, how will you interview? Infoadder95 (talk) 20:01, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've noticed that you're going around posting messages on various users' talk pages. These seem to be of two kinds: greetings, and invitations to a study of some sort. So far your entire edit history consists of user space edits, with no edits to any article or draft page. Your activity is also triggering various edit filters, which often indicates problematic editing of some sort or another.
As I'm sure you know, Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and therefore every editor's overriding objective here should be to help build an encyclopaedia. You say on your user page that you " would like to contribute to Wikipedia". Could you perhaps share your thinking on how what you're doing helps build an encyclopaedia?
I acknowledge that most of my edits do not directly improve the articles. But I hope to do interviews to understand Wikipedia editors, which I believe will help contribute to Wikipedia as well. It also explains reaching out to users through their talk pages. But please let me know if it causes problems or if you have any suggestions. Thank you! Phoebezz22 (talk) 15:32, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks for responding. I don't know if what you're doing contravenes any policies (then again, I also don't know that it doesn't); I was mostly just curious. I won't bother you any more over this, although I can't promise that someone else won't! :) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:41, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much! I thought I got into some trouble without realizing it. That being said, if you any experience using LLMs when contributing to Wikipedia, I would love to invite you to join our study as well - we want to understand how Wikipedia editors use/think of the impacts of LLMs, and ultimately these insights would help inform guardrails around LLM usage in knowledge production processes. To check out more: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:How_LLMs_impact_knowledge_production_processes Again, thank you for stopping by and talking to me! Phoebezz22 (talk) 15:47, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sending a lot of emails and messages like this can be considered spam and might be prohibited on Wikipedia. You may want to ask where an appropriate place to link your study is to avoid unnecessarily disturbing editors. Also we have a policy that reduces mass editing. As much as it may be interesting to participate in that survey. AwesomeAasim18:27, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I just want to note that Wikipedia:Research recruitment is not a policy or a guideline, but is a low impact essay. It has had 30 page views in the last 30 days, and has fewer than 30 people watching it.
I'm a little bothered by the fact that it is written as if it were a policy, and even repeatedly describes itself as a policy, when it was only proposed as a policy and never actually became one. I don't know what is the best way to go about seeking research participants, and you can follow the recommendations of that essay if you like, but it carries no officiality and you are not obligated to do so. Photos of Japan (talk) 07:54, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Photos of Japan Thank you so much for the clarification! Editors have also pointed out the risk of being considered as spam. Do you by chance have any advice on how I should deal with this concern moving forward? Thank you so much for your help! Phoebezz22 (talk) 14:48, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I do think that creating a project page (just transcribing the meta project page) and hosting an RFC with some canvassing would be a good way to solicit participants, and if you like I could do that for you. I don't believe you need to follow the rest of that essay and halt everything else you are doing, other than posting to a lot of individual editor's talk pages as others have expressed concerns about that being spam. Photos of Japan (talk) 17:56, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Photos of Japan Thank you so much! I REALLY appreciate it. If you could help me getting started to create a project page, that would be awesome! (Quick question: this would be project page in Wikipedia on top of the Meta project page?) Thank you a lot for your help, and I would definitely listen to the advice. Phoebezz22 (talk) 18:42, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, I would just create a duplicate of the meta page here on Wikipedia in your user space with a note at the top indicating that it is a transclusion from the Meta project page and then link to the Meta page. Having it on Wikipedia would let us use its talk page as a centralized place to discuss the project here on Wikipedia. I would then start an RFC on the talk page and list notices at some appropriate venues. I'm going to be busy with someone for maybe the next hour or two, but if you like I could do this afterwards. Photos of Japan (talk) 19:07, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The more I think about it, the more an RFC actually seems like a bad idea. An RFC asking how you should recruit participants would probably just result in a morass of divergent opinions and end up being closed with no consensus. An RFC seeking to recruit participants would also be an inappropriate usage of an RFC.
Indiscriminately sending announcements to editors can be disruptive for any number of reasons. If the editors are uninvolved, the message has the function of "spam" and is disruptive to that user's experience.
However, that policy was written to address canvassing others to discussions, so it is difficult to gauge how relevant it is with regards to soliciting participation for research. However, if you target your messages to users then it would no longer be indiscriminate. For instance, you could message users at Category:Wikipedia bot operators (since they may use LLMs to help generate code), Category:Wikipedian translators (who might use LLMs to assist translation), Category:User en-1 (who might use LLMs to assist their English). I also think any user who has participated in a discussion on LLMs would be fine to message, WT:Large language models has a list of past and current discussions on LLM usage.
Looking back through previous discussions it seems most people advise researchers to solicit participants by posting to Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) which received 12,000 views in the last 30 days, as well as any other relevant noticeboards or Wikiprojects (for instance WikiProject AI Cleanup). For the time being, I would recommend posting to the Village Pump, and other relevant pages, and selectively choosing which users to individually message based off a potential interest in LLMs. Photos of Japan (talk) 00:58, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would actually advise against sending multiple messages to users potentially interested. You can maybe mention in a post at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) (not as an RfC) that you are doing a survey and see what you get in results. Will it be biased? Probably. But that might be the way to get responses without needlessly sending out spam messages. AwesomeAasim15:09, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's really subjective determining how many individuals you can message before it is considered disruptive. I wouldn't rule out contacting individuals entirely. Komonzia, for instance, created a userbox stating they use carefully use ChatGPT to research for and edit Wikipedia, so they seem like they would be fine to message. Photos of Japan (talk) 21:04, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My name is starking. I am wrote an article about tendui village which is famous there. I am not written this article only for tourist purpose but also people who searching about this village can get more info about this village. As wikipedia is a info sharing place so, people can get info about this place.
I want to request you to public this info article.
