Change Details

This task involves the work of analyzing how people //qualitatively report// their experience with the first iteration of reference Edit Check. NOTE: the corresponding quantitative analysis will happen in T342404 === Decisions to be made - [ ] 1. Will we make any fundamental changes to where and how the Reference Check is presented before investing more energy into refining and scaling the initial approach? === Learning objectives 1. **Motivation**: Do Newcomers and Junior Contributors from SSA perceive Edit Check to be motivating, empowering, and supportive? //Said another way: volunteers will not feel discouraged or unfairly punished by the feedback Edit Check presents.// 2. **Auditability**: Do Senior Contributors feel like they have sufficient ability to ensure the choices Edit Check presents to newcomers and Junior Contributors align with the broader project's expectations? --- //This task was inspired by the point [User:Joe Roe](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Joe_Roe) raised on [mediawiki.org](https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Edit_check#c-Joe_Roe-20230630144700-Feedback:_Joe_Roe).//

This task involves the work of analyzing how people //qualitatively report// their experience with the first iteration of reference Edit Check. NOTE: the corresponding quantitative analysis will happen in T342404 === Decisions to be made - [ ] 1. Will we make any fundamental changes to where and how the Reference Check is presented before investing more energy into refining and scaling the initial approach? === Learning objectives 1. **Motivation**: Do Newcomers and Junior Contributors from SSA perceive Edit Check to be motivating, empowering, and supportive? //Said another way: volunteers will not feel discouraged or unfairly punished by the feedback Edit Check presents.// 2. **Auditability**: Do Senior Contributors feel like they have sufficient ability to ensure the choices Edit Check presents to newcomers and Junior Contributors align with the broader project's expectations? === Research questions |Facet|Question|Metric(s) for evaluation |---|---|--- |**Awareness**|Are newcomers and Junior Contributors encountering the guidance Edit Check is designed to offer them?|Proportion of newcomers and Junior Contributors that make an edit attempt and are presented Edit Check feedback |**Engagement**| Are newcomers and Junior Contributors considering and acting on the calls to action Edit Check is presenting them with?|Proportion of newcomers and Junior Contributors that are presented Edit Check feedback and engage with it in some way (for example, (1) select “yes” to adding a citation, (2) explicitly choose not to add a reference with providing a reason, (3) explicitly choose not to add a reference without providing a reason) |**Relevancy**| Is Edit Check presenting newcomers and Juniors Contributors from SSA with feedback that is relevant to the changes they are attempting to make?|**1)** Proportion of newcomers and Junior Contributors that are presented with Edit Check feedback and indicate that the check was shown in error and **2)** Proportion of newcomers and Junior contributors that add a reference after being presented edit check --- //This task was inspired by the point [User:Joe Roe](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Joe_Roe) raised on [mediawiki.org](https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Edit_check#c-Joe_Roe-20230630144700-Feedback:_Joe_Roe).//

This task involves the work of analyzing how people //qualitatively report// their experience with the first iteration of reference Edit Check. NOTE: the corresponding quantitative analysis will happen in T342404 === Decisions to be made - [ ] 1. Will we make any fundamental changes to where and how the Reference Check is presented before investing more energy into refining and scaling the initial approach? === Learning objectives 1. **Motivation**: Do Newcomers and Junior Contributors from SSA perceive Edit Check to be motivating, empowering, and supportive? //Said another way: volunteers will not feel discouraged or unfairly punished by the feedback Edit Check presents.// 2. **Auditability**: Do Senior Contributors feel like they have sufficient ability to ensure the choices Edit Check presents to newcomers and Junior Contributors align with the broader project's expectations? === Research questions |Facet|Question|Metric(s) for evaluation |---|---|--- |**Awareness**|Are newcomers and Junior Contributors encountering the guidance Edit Check is designed to offer them?|Proportion of newcomers and Junior Contributors that make an edit attempt and are presented Edit Check feedback |**Engagement**| Are newcomers and Junior Contributors considering and acting on the calls to action Edit Check is presenting them with?|Proportion of newcomers and Junior Contributors that are presented Edit Check feedback and engage with it in some way (for example, (1) select “yes” to adding a citation, (2) explicitly choose not to add a reference with providing a reason, (3) explicitly choose not to add a reference without providing a reason) |**Relevancy**| Is Edit Check presenting newcomers and Juniors Contributors from SSA with feedback that is relevant to the changes they are attempting to make?|**1)** Proportion of newcomers and Junior Contributors that are presented with Edit Check feedback and indicate that the check was shown in error and **2)** Proportion of newcomers and Junior contributors that add a reference after being presented edit check --- //This task was inspired by the point [User:Joe Roe](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Joe_Roe) raised on [mediawiki.org](https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Edit_check#c-Joe_Roe-20230630144700-Feedback:_Joe_Roe).//