Change Details

New editors generally start their editing experience (especially with the Newcomer Homepage) by learning how to make individual edits. Newcomer Homepage structured tasks - which the Dashboard aims to extend - provide editors with the confidence to make changes to Wikipedia content. We would like to extend that learning to the next step - showing editors that other users are also changing content, and they can review those changes. We also have opportunities to show new editors what additional changes have happened to pages they have contributed to. Users who make a change to a page are generally interested in following whether their change sticks, and what other changes are made to that page. In informal qualitative polls we have found that somewhere around half of active editors visit their Watchlist as the first page they open when visiting Wikipedia to begin editing. The Watchlist enables them to answer questions like "What has happened since I last visited Wikipedia?" and "What might need my attention now?". RecentChanges and the Watchlist provide a purely chronological view of edits to Wikipedia. Although they can be filtered, they do not allow users to sort by //importance// or //noteworthiness//. The first edits users see on these pages are simply the most recent to be made, not the most significant, or most requiring review by other editors. # 'Edits for you' We would like to explore building an "Edits for you" feed. The intention would be to surface recent edits that a given editor is likely to find interesting and worth looking at. Unlike {T404174}, here we're thinking beyond the moderator use case to active editors in general. We don't want to focus this feed on edits requiring moderation, though they could certainly be noteworthy and worth displaying among other edits. Defining 'noteworthy' will be the main challenge here. There are two aspects to this: general interest, and personal interest. Some signals might indicate an edit is inherently interesting, and others might indicate the edit is interesting to a specific user. **General** * Size of edit (Large additions or removals) * Recency (Prioritise more recent edits) * Number of thanks the edit received (Well-thanked edits are likely to be interesting) * Revert status (Reverted edits are probably less interesting) * **Personalised** * Topic (is this edit to a page in a topic the user frequently edits?) * Edits to pages the user created * Edits to pages the user edited * # Open questions Other open questions we haven't thought about yet: * Should this feed be main namespace only? It seems like some of the potential aspects listed above would be easiest to rank if we assumed every edit is a content edit. (e.g. talk page edits are almost always substantial additions of content, but content edits might vary more in size and often be negative in size) * Should this feed include logged actions? An article being patrolled or protected is a very noteworthy action.

New editors generally start their editing experience (especially with the Newcomer Homepage) by learning how to make individual edits. Newcomer Homepage structured tasks - which the Dashboard aims to extend - provide editors with the confidence to make changes to Wikipedia content. We would like to progress that learning to the next step - showing editors that other users are also changing content, and they can review those changes. We also have opportunities to show new editors what additional changes have happened to pages they have contributed to. Users who make a change to a page are generally interested in following whether their change sticks, and what other changes are made to that page. We think that this will engage users to return to the site and make additional edits. In informal qualitative polls we have found that somewhere around half of active editors visit their Watchlist as the first page they open when visiting Wikipedia to begin editing. The Watchlist enables them to answer questions like "What has happened since I last visited Wikipedia?" and "What might need my attention now?". RecentChanges and the Watchlist provide a purely chronological view of edits to Wikipedia. Although they can be filtered, they do not allow users to sort by //importance// or //noteworthiness//. The first edits users see on these pages are simply the most recent to be made, not the most significant, or most requiring review by other editors. # 'Edits for you' We would like to explore building an "Edits for you" feed. The intention would be to surface recent edits that a given editor is likely to find interesting and worth looking at. Unlike {T404174}, here we're thinking beyond the moderator use case to active editors in general. We don't want to focus this feed on edits requiring moderation, though they could certainly be noteworthy and worth displaying among other edits. Defining 'noteworthy' will be the main challenge here. There are two aspects to this: general interest, and personal interest. Some signals might indicate an edit is inherently interesting, and others might indicate the edit is interesting to a specific user. **General** * Size of edit (Large additions or removals) * Recency (Prioritise more recent edits) * Number of thanks the edit received (Well-thanked edits are likely to be interesting) * Revert status (Reverted edits are probably less interesting) * **Personalised** * Topic (is this edit to a page in a topic the user frequently edits?) * Edits to pages the user created * Edits to pages the user edited * # Open questions Other open questions we haven't thought about yet: * Should this feed be main namespace only? It seems like some of the potential aspects listed above would be easiest to rank if we assumed every edit is a content edit. (e.g. talk page edits are almost always substantial additions of content, but content edits might vary more in size and often be negative in size) * Should this feed include logged actions? An article being patrolled or protected is a very noteworthy action.

New editors generally start their editing experience (especially with the Newcomer Homepage) by learning how to make individual edits. Newcomer Homepage structured tasks - which the Dashboard aims to extend - provide editors with the confidence to make changes to Wikipedia content. We would like to extendprogress that learning to the next step - showing editors that other users are also changing content, and they can review those changes. We also have opportunities to show new editors what additional changes have happened to pages they have contributed to. Users who make a change to a page are generally interested in following whether their change sticks, and what other changes are made to that page. and wWe think that other changes are made to that pagethis will engage users to return to the site and make additional edits. In informal qualitative polls we have found that somewhere around half of active editors visit their Watchlist as the first page they open when visiting Wikipedia to begin editing. The Watchlist enables them to answer questions like "What has happened since I last visited Wikipedia?" and "What might need my attention now?". RecentChanges and the Watchlist provide a purely chronological view of edits to Wikipedia. Although they can be filtered, they do not allow users to sort by //importance// or //noteworthiness//. The first edits users see on these pages are simply the most recent to be made, not the most significant, or most requiring review by other editors. # 'Edits for you' We would like to explore building an "Edits for you" feed. The intention would be to surface recent edits that a given editor is likely to find interesting and worth looking at. Unlike {T404174}, here we're thinking beyond the moderator use case to active editors in general. We don't want to focus this feed on edits requiring moderation, though they could certainly be noteworthy and worth displaying among other edits. Defining 'noteworthy' will be the main challenge here. There are two aspects to this: general interest, and personal interest. Some signals might indicate an edit is inherently interesting, and others might indicate the edit is interesting to a specific user. **General** * Size of edit (Large additions or removals) * Recency (Prioritise more recent edits) * Number of thanks the edit received (Well-thanked edits are likely to be interesting) * Revert status (Reverted edits are probably less interesting) * **Personalised** * Topic (is this edit to a page in a topic the user frequently edits?) * Edits to pages the user created * Edits to pages the user edited * # Open questions Other open questions we haven't thought about yet: * Should this feed be main namespace only? It seems like some of the potential aspects listed above would be easiest to rank if we assumed every edit is a content edit. (e.g. talk page edits are almost always substantial additions of content, but content edits might vary more in size and often be negative in size) * Should this feed include logged actions? An article being patrolled or protected is a very noteworthy action.