Currently, when editors save an edit, they are redirected to the "read" view of the article, which is not encouraging them to continue editing. Right after publishing an edit seems a good time to propose a relevant follow-up contribution for the user to make. For example, after contributing a new paragraph of content, the system can propose to add a reference or an image to improve the quality of the contribution as a next step.
A possible execution of the idea is illustrated below:
Picking a follow-up action allows for the system to provide additional guidance on how o do such activity and why it is important for the project. This will help to educate new editors about key concepts that make a good contribution, reducing their chances of being reverted and abandoning.
- Focus on new editors. We may want to show only the follow-up suggestions to new editors. More experienced editors may just get a more general "continue editing" call to action or nothing at all if it is considere distracting.
- Suggested tasks should be relevant. For example, we should not suggest to add a reference if the user already did so.
- Messaging should be positive. Follow-up activities should be presented as ways to improve the previous contribution, even if they represent improvement that reflect something missing that makes the contribution likely to be reverted.
Research (including New-Editor-Experiences research) shows that new editors have issues understanding key contribution principles (verifiability, copyright, etc.) and that they learn iteratively. As opposed to reading the manual in advance, proposing specific ways to improve their contributions can be an applied way to learn these concepts one at a time.
It would be great to measure the impact at both short and long terms, measuring (a) how many new contributions are made because of this new suggestion, and (b) the effects in retention for these users.