Reference Check is designed to increase the likelihood that newcomers and Junior Contributors who are editing from within Sub-Saharan Africa:
1. Publish edits that they are proud of and experienced volunteers consider useful
2. Return to edit again in the future
This task involves the work with running an A/B test (or perhaps a [multivariate test](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multivariate_statistics) [i]) to evaluate the extent to which this initial Edit Check has been effective at impacting newcomers and Junior Contributors in the ways described above.
=== Decision(s) To Be Made
- [ ] 1. Decide whether the impact Edit Check is having on users' behavior are positive enough to be made available by default, at all Wikipedias.
=== Hypotheses
|ID|Hypothesis|Metric(s) for Evaluation
|---|---|---
=== Leading indicators
|ID|Name|Metric(s) for Evaluation
|---|---|---
|1.|Citation reuse|Percentage of people who elect to add a reference and use Citoid's {nav Re-use} feature to do so [ii]
=== Guardrails
|ID|Name|Metric(s) for Evaluation
|---|---|---
=== Decision Matrix
|ID|Scenario|Plan of Action
|---|---|---
---
i. Where a "multivariate test" in this context could look like tests wherein we compare: **A)** multiple variations of Reference Check user experiences or **B)** people who are shown the source editor by default, to people who are shown VE by default, and people who are shown VE by default with Edit Check activated, as @MNeisler and @DLynch raised offline
ii. See T331582#9132480