This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hello. This is Flameviper, saying that I'm back to my happy home here at Wikipedia. I had to leave here for a month or so, for reasons I will not discuss right now.
And for other reasons that I will also not discuss right now, I have realized that Wikipedia is the place for the Flamey Snake. So, without further ado, I'll discuss the current state of things.
As far as Adopt-a-User, I want to say that I am very proud of its current progress and that Lethaniol seems to be doing a great job at managing the ever-growing program. I must say that at first, I had some doubt at whether somebody else would be able to do the same thing I did, but after periodically checking in to see what Lethaniol has done, I am assured that Adopt-a-User is in safe hands.
Although Lethaniol is doing a great job currently, I don't think that one person will be eventually able to control the huge program. And so if you need any help with things, just call on me. I'll be there in a flash.
Lopng live Wiki, ~ Flameviper 15:02, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi Flame - thanks for the compliments - but it was your ideas and hard work that got the program up and running - credit where credit due.
There is still lots of things to do with the development of the program, from updating the Adopter's and Adoptee's areas to coming up with a system that allows easy adoption for an increasing number of users that want it (see suggestion above).
Will up date the to do list properly tomorrow - with both development things to do and generally day-to-day stuff e.g. keeping the list at User:Lethaniol/Adopters up to date.
Anyway glad to have you back Flameviper, and I hope you and others will help take the program to the next level - a valued wikipedia project. Cheers Lethaniol00:10, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Lots of People wanting to be Adopted!
It is becoming obvious that as the Adopt-a-user program becomes more and more popular, the Category:Wikipedians seeking to be adopted in Adopt-a-user is becoming a bit cumbersome. This is because it is harder for newer Adopters to find people that they want to offer adoption to, and that some user seeking Adoption are currently not offered it. The solution mentioned above to remove the Template:Adoptme from users that have been offered multiple adoptions or been inactive since adoption offer â has worked to some extent cutting the numbers to about 2/3, but that still leaves 30 odd users seeking adoption and that number is only going to get bigger.
One of the reason for increasing demand has been the Template:Welcome123 which has advertised the program extremely well. I made an alteration recently [1] that removes the instructions on how to add Adoptme to a user page, and instead guides people to the WP:ADOPT page. This means new users will have to read up about Adoption, giving them more buy in, before learning how to be Adopted.
Create a new user box that Adopters replace the Adoptme user box with once they have offered Adoption to a user. This user box will obviously add that user to the category mentioned above.
Initially someone (likely me :( ) will have to go round and change these user boxes, but once people get into the swing the Adopters themselves can do this 10 second job. One of main advantages of this proposal is that it will still allow us to keep an eye on users that have been offered adoption but not adopted as yet, as well as leaving them a user box with links/info on how to request another adopter if they do not like the user who has offered adoption. The main disadvantage is the extra editing that each adopter has to do.
The next thing I would like to do is leave a message on all the users who are/or have been involved in the program to push up interest in the new Adopter's and Adoptee's Areas as well as boost interest. So for the following people I was thinking of leaving the follow info
Explain the new Adoptoffer user box/sub cat, and that they might need to approach users directly if they wish to adopt.
Users who showed an interest in the program but never got involved (e.g. during setup loads of users left messages of support on talk page, see archive, but have not come back)
Tell about the success of Adopt-a-user.
Encourage them to come and look, and get involved.
Right any objections. I known this a bit like unsolicited spam, but I think it should be okay as a one off. Hence why I want to get all the information in there that needs to be there - anything missing. I will likely send out these messages on Saturday, and maybe could do we some help - please. Cheers Lethaniol17:13, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Right have sent out message to all the last three cats on the list above, just need to get around to writing and sending out messages to all current adoptees. - anyone fancy helping out???? Cheers Lethaniol15:42, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Some questions.
How does adoption work? Do you keep an eye on them and offer advice when they make mistakes, or just wait until they come to you with questions, or what? How long does a typical adoption take? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 11:42, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Well here is my opinion - other opinions would be really welcomed. Generally I let the adoptee ask me questions, and keep out of their hair. If an adoptee does not ask many questions or has been silent for a while, I drop by their talk page give a friendly hello and maybe check out their contributions to see what they have been up to. Only if they are having obvious problems e.g. blocks, vandalism tags, conflict with another user, or minor things like not signing talk pages or using edit summaries will I seek to offer obvious advice.
In terms of the process of adoption the standard way seems to be to drop by the category for users seeking adoption, asking up to a couple of these users if they want adoption (you will generally not get a 100% success rate when you offer adoption - but should be prepared for it if it happens), wait for them to confirm on your/their talk page, confirm adoption by updating adoption templates, and then ask them what they would like help with. The adoption then continues either until:
The adoptee becomes suitably experienced to graduate from the program (for an average user probably between 1-3months).
The adoptee becomes inactive or does not respond to your offers of help.
The adoptee is unhappy with their adopter and wishes a new one or wishes to leave the program.
The adopter becomes unhappy with their adoptee - e.g. in the rare case that an adoptee is using there adopter to hide behind when they get into conflict.
The length of adoption is interesting because I have found that I get lots of simple questions early on, and then as the adopotee becomes more comfortable with Wikipedia less questions, but when you do get them they tend to be of a more involved nature e.g. dealing with conflict, setting up templates, wikiprojects etc.. or reviewing their work.
Yeah, that answered my questions. I'll go add myself to the list of adopters and find an adoptee. Thanks! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 18:14, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
What to do when one adopter is not enough?
Hi! May be I am asking too much, but don't you think an adopted user can get tied down with only one adopter when he may need more than one. With due respect to my adopter (who has been very good to me so far), how do I request co-adoption. One may need more than one opinion, quicker answer to a question or wider area of expertise. Moreover this is program is a tremendous opportunity for new users like me to learn stuff and clear the doubts. Please Help! Mahalo!! --Vikas Kumar OjhaTalk to me!19:20, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi Vikas - you are welcome to have a co-adopter - either put the {{Adoptme}} back on your userpage, and leave a message on you talk page stating that you would like a co-adopter for the above reasons (do not forget to tell your current adopter :):) ) or better yet search through here and contact an available adopter you like, yourself. Cheers Lethaniol19:56, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Lethaniol! I'll give it a shot right away. Hope my current adopter is not offended, as that would be very unfortunate. He has been good to me and we share many interests. I don't know if I can choose someone from the list who may be able to help me my way. I need someone, along with my current adopter, who can give me more time, take more interest in my work I am doing and also teach me what I don't know about WP with a planned approach. I see that you have a lot adoptees, is there a place for one more? Or may be you could suggest someone who can meet my inappropriately heavy demands. Just Kidding! :) Mahalo!! --Vikas Kumar OjhaTalk to me!03:23, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
I am a bit busy to take on another active adoption at the moment - I have no suggestions really - as far as I have seen the vast majority of Adopters on the list mentioned above are top-notch users. Have a look through them - if you see one or two you like approach them. Cheers Lethaniol15:43, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Taking a break from Adopt-a-user work
Hi everyone -
You may have noticed that I have been putting a lot of work into Adopt-a-user over the last two months - well now it is time for me to take a break and play around with other things in Wikipedia. I will stay as a very active Adopter and continue to Adopt new users, also I will continue with the following tasks:
Complete and send a message to all Adoptees as mentioned above.
I hope that someone will take on the developmental work and take Adopt-a-user to the next level. I am always here though if you need any help or advice. Cheers Lethaniol14:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I just wanted to let the people who administrate and edit this great help forum know that I have just gone through all the pages (at least the ones I could find) and categorized the pages under Category:Wikipedia Adopt-a-User. This way, it will be much easier to a) find all the forum's pages in one place, and b) update all pages using AWB if something needs to be changed in the future.
I also tweaked the userboxes very slightly by adding category suppression to them. This way the actual userboxes can be displayed on the templates page instead of a substituted version. This gives a "live preview" of the actual userboxes, which also helps to detect if anyone has vandalized the boxes. I have also tried to track down the non-user pages where these userboxes have been displayed and suppressed the categories on those pages (since they aren't users, the pages don't need adoption).
If anyone has any questions about what I did or would like more details, feel free to ask. I think this is a great idea for a program, and I have recently adopted three Wikipedians. I thought it would be nice to give back to the program a bit, too. Cheers! --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 03:14, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
I think that those who have been blocked from editing in the past 6 months because they have used a proxy such as Google Web Accelerator should still be allowed to adopt. If they already are, that needs to be specified. âThe preceding unsigned comment was added by Jesin (talk ⢠contribs) 18:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC).
Eh, clearly such a thing would be allowed, I would think. Apply common sense--we want to avoid instruction creep. --Sopoforic06:38, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Not particularly strict - if you discuss on this page first. If someone has plenty of experience on other wiki projects where the policies etc... are similar then I am fine, and I sure many others, would be fine in them adopting. Cheers Lethaniol23:35, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
I would like to adopt a user. I do not yet have 500 edits on wikipedia, but i do know it's policies and techniques, and i laso have significant experience on wikibooks. Would it be okay for me to get involved in this way? Urbane User(Talk)(Contributions)18:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Yes I think that would be fine but I suppose there is one proviso - IMHO you need to be editing on Wikipedia regularly i.e. every day or two so that you can respond to any questions that your adoptees might have. Cheers Lethaniol20:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
I see no problem with it, however, I just want to make sure it's okay to use AWB to change {{adopt me}} to {{adoptoffer}} on their user page. Is it? --TeckWizParlateContribs@03:07, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
I don't see anything wrong with it in principle, but wanting to use AWB implies you would be offering adoption to a plurality of users, and you should be careful not to offer adoption to too many users at once. I know you are a capable person, though, and I'm sure you have it well under control. Dar-Ape03:41, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
It doesn't seem like adopties are that active. I usually get only one question per day. I guess they're still getting into Wikipedia. So, I have plenty of space for people. --TeckWizParlateContribs@03:59, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
I do not see a problem with using AWB (though you should be using something like the piped link templates: {{Adoptoffer|Lethaniol}}. Obviously I too have quite a few adoptees, but I find that their question load is low. Hence when I offer adoption I normally do so to a handful of users (4-8), because although the initial workload will be high, it soon drops off. Cheers Lethaniol12:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Inactive users
Some people like WillStott (talk·contribs) make only a few edits, sometimes only to their userpage and within a very short period of time, add {{adoptme}} to their userpage, and then leave. These users, as in this case, show little or no interest in the project and seem unlikely to return, but fill up Category:Wikipedians seeking to be adopted in Adopt-a-user and make it more difficult to identify active users who need assistance. Is there a solution to this other than removing {{adoptme}} from dormant users' pages? If not, how long should one wait before doing so? Dar-Ape17:24, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
I noticed a new user, Saikano who was getting in some minor trouble and was listed as seeking adoption. Unfortunately, he showed little interest in improvement, so I have "dumped" him. Is there any procedure for this aside from removing the userboxes? —dgiestc02:17, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
No procedure really as the programme is still quite new. Generally I try to keep an adoptee on, even if they are getting into trouble, and try and steer them onto the right track. Of course, if this has failed, and the user has obviously no intention of improving their conduct, then I would suggest leaving a polite note on their page telling them what you are doing and why. Also include that if they wish another adoption they can put {{adoptme}} onto their userpage, but suggest that they will need to want to improve their outlook if they want a successful adoption. Then remove the adoption templates from yours and their userpages.
Basically, and I have had some experience with "bad" adoptees, including sockpuppets, I always try to assume good faith and give the adoptee every reason to come back to WP:ADOPT if they want to improve their conduct. Hope that helps. Cheers Lethaniol10:56, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Yeah I tried several times to point him in the right direction, but it seemed all he wanted to do was work on his user page. See his talk page history if you want the gory deatils. —dgiestc18:23, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
My only idea is to leave a message on all adopters user talk page requesting that they take on more adoptees (especially as most adoptions go quiet after a few days). Thoughts please. Cheers Lethaniol16:02, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Not all prospective adoptees seem to understand how the system is supposed to work. Over the past week I have offered adoption to six editors, and only one replied. At all.--Anthony.bradbury14:44, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
I have similar experiences Anthony - I normally offer adoptions in batches of 5-10, but find only about 1/3 reply. This probably for two reasons.
That new users will sign up for the adoption service, and then get bored of Wikipedia - hence why we have the category for users who have already been offered adoption.
That the user had been waiting so long for an Adopter to offer adoption that they have got bored.
Now I think the first problem has been dealt with, but the second one does need sorting and that is what this section and the section below is about. Cheers Lethaniol14:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Waiting for adoption
Is there any way of listing those seeking adoption in date order of when they asked for it, instead of alphabetical order? I've offered adoption to a couple of people but had no idea whether they had been waiting for a much longer, or shorter, time than others. (I tried to avoid alphabetical bias by starting in the middle...) Thoughts? Bencherlite22:43, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Not a bad idea. Perhaps the template could include a date field, or something? In my case, for the record, I actually started at the back end, and included a bit of randomness to try to avoid alphabetic bias. The Jade Knight00:12, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, I am a sort of technological wizard if I do say so myself. I'll see if I can come up with something that fits the bill. Ok? Zazzer14:33, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
This sounds like a good idea if someone can make it. Ideally we should try to keep the number of people looking for adoption low though - say less than 20 - that way this wont be an issue. Cheers Lethaniol14:01, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
I believe some other templates that use dates do it by making a wrapper template that you subst, which includes the real template and some magic words as parameters. I've never made a template, but as I understand it, it wouldn't be that hard to add auto-dating to the template. --Sopoforic09:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
How can an adopter choose suitable adoptee?
We can sort them by language, issues and some other criteria. For example if adopter and adoptee have the same language - when non of them are native speakers of English- or both of them participate in the same issues it can be more helpful and successful. For example I'm persian therefor I can adopt persians better than the other.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 08:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
I suggest to make a form for who seek adoption and ask him/her language, time zone and some other important issues to help adopter with finding more appropriate one. --Sa.vakilian(t-c) 09:47, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
The first should contain everyone involved in Adopt-a-user, adopters and adoptees alike (though most should be found only in the subcategories. I wonder why they're not). The 2nd is only those who have adopted others, not those seeking to adopt or adoptees. The Jade Knight23:07, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Does this give the wrong idea about Wikipedia?
It seems like a program like this may give new users the wrong idea that Wikipedia is a social networking site rather than an encyclopedia. Is there some purpose to adoption that can't also be served by the normal type of feedback that editors will get from other editors? Friday(talk)23:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
There was a little discussion about this in the archive of this page, see [2]. If anything, through the adoption program, it should be made clear we are not a social networking site, along with all the other policies. Not everyone learns the same. If we can convert a few extra, different-types of members that might have not stuck around otherwise, then the program has benefit. --MECUâtalk01:58, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
How to find a suitable adoptee?
I am looking into adopting a user, but to make sure my first experience with the project is a good one, I'd like it to be a user in a specific field of interest. I don't want to be unable to help them out because I happen to be clueless on the subjects they edit. Has anyone found an easier way to find adoptees that do not involve checking every user who is seeking adoption by hand? - Mgm|(talk)12:37, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't know of any way to do this other than checking each user by hand, but in my opinion, it's not that important. The questions an adoptee will have won't be along the lines of, "I'm confused about the different styles of artwork used during the Renaissance." They'll be more along the lines of, "How do I add references/images/etc. to a page?" or "What do I do if XYZ keeps reverting my changes?" You should be able to answer those questions regardless of the field of interest.
Even if the question is something like, "Is XYZ notable enough to warrant its own article?" you can provide information on notability policies, and let the adoptee figure out the answer themself. —PurpleRAIN15:54, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
New member
Hi there, I've just signed up for this program and have also recently 'graduated' as an adoptee of coelacan, who feels I am ready to adopt other users. I am very interested in supporting and encouraging users who wish to become part of the project.
I have offered adoption to a few people on the list and notice that there are some who have been on quite a while and wonder if there is a way to sort the list by date so that those waiting the longest can be contacted in a more timely fashion.
I also noticed the above thread re: a waiting period before becoming an adopter. Does anyone have a problem with me jumping right in?
I agree that sorting potential adoptees by date would be helpful. I think what probably happens sometimes is that someone signs up, but is not adopted for a while, and figures things out on their own, or with the help of others. They never bother to remove the userbox/category, and stay on the list, even though they've been active on Wikipedia for a while. âThe preceding unsigned comment was added by PurpleRain (talk ⢠contribs) 15:34, 24 April 2007 (UTC).
As one way of dealing with this I have left a message offering adoption on a few pages and also said something like...I see you've been around awhile, if you feel you no longer need adoption you could remove the 'adoption' tag from your user page. Still, it would be nice to have a chronological list. I was offered adoption within a few days of posting my interest but some have been waiting for months!--killing sparrows (chirp!)16:29, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm one of the newbies happily being adopted by a chinese bird killer like killing sparrows. ;-) I'm not a newbie to Wikipedia, English simply is not my first language which makes contributions difficult. Sometimes I just don't understand the abrvs on help pages. Tonight I suggested to adopt the adoption system to de:WP. Isn't that a brilliant interwiki idea? --MrsMyer00:59, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't know....
I'm wanting to get more involved in Wikipedia, and have been doing a considerable amount of vandal fighting over the past fortnight. I've been contributing for some time, mostly anonymously, though I can certainly say my first edit was 31st Dec 2005. I registered a username with which I made my first edit 22/03/06, but I have abandoned this account some time ago because it is a pseudonym that is very easily associated with me generally, and anybody could find out my home address etc just using my username and a simple WHOIS. If anybody needs to know, I will tell them that old username, if they ask by email. So that's why I've abandoned my old account.
I'm not big on writing articles outside my own knowledge, I will find, fix, and correct articles within my limited knowledge. I'm fighting vandals. I am a reasonable person with fairly sound judgement, and a cool temperament; I can deal with vandals and their friends without getting into a rage. I'd like to get more into copy editing, and am usually open for discussion on any issue. I'd rather a discussion than an attack.
Anyhow: should I adopt, or should I be adopted? Or, would it be best for me not to get involved at this point? Jsc8323:30, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
In my opinion, if you want to adopt, you ought to be fairly familiar with policy, so that you'll be able to help your adoptee when they ask questions. You should probably also be ready to give general advice about the articles your adoptees are working on.
The edits in your contrib history are mostly (entirely?) vandal-fighting; based only on that, I'd say that you probably aren't ready yet to adopt. You say that you've been around longer, though, so you may already know enough, but if you haven't been involved in any of the processes previously, you ought to look around project space, to be sure you understand the main processes a new editor is likely to encounter (probably WP:AfD, WP:CSD, and WP:FUC; WP:DR might be a good idea, too).
If you'd like to try being adopted for a while first, just to be sure, I'd be happy to adopt you. My current adoptees are very quiet, so I was about to go looking for someone else to adopt, anyway. If you do choose to become an adopter, then please also feel free to ask me if you need any advice. --Sopoforic01:45, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your kind response. Upon consideration though, I feel that while I may not have all the knowledge yet to be able to adopt a new user, I don't think I need to be 'adopted' either. I have studied the policies and guidelines many times over many months, I know what they are and why they are there, though I haven't really put them into practice.
This account has mainly been used for vandal-fighting, yes, but that is mostly because it is so easy. Vandalism can be spotted a mile off (especially with the tools by Lupin), and I can do it while concentrating on something else, like TV. I've created at least one stub article, such as Evening Star (Ipswich). This is a paper based in my town, it's been around for over 100 years, I know it well as my family used to (and still) buy it daily for as long as I can remember. I remember taking a tour at their offices as a school trip when I was about ten! So I want to create that article and make it both interesting and informative. I've held back pending a response from them after I requested some information on their history, notable campaigns etc.
Back on track, my point is that while I'm not doing everything right now, I'm aware of what's happening. I'm not creating or improving many articles factually, because I haven't got much new to contribute right now. Most of the subjects I know anything about exist, and usually teach me a thing or two! I'm not an outspoken person anyway, so I won't jump into a discussion or debate where I don't need to. If I know something is wrong, I will probably add my two cents.
I think I'll just abstain from the adoption programme right now. I feel I don't qualify at this time to either be adopted or an adopter. Cheers though, made me think about my role on WP more. I wish this project every success. Jsc8320:25, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, something should probably be done. At least leave a message on his talk page and give him a chance to explain himself. The Jade Knight23:04, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
They only have 3 current adoptees. One in the list graduated. I would say a block is a block is a block and we should de-list them as an adopter and spread out the remaining three over other willing adoptees. I'd be happy to take one of the three. --MECUâtalk23:18, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
I was thinking that myself. As for explaining, pgk has repeatedly warned them about copy violations, which they seem to have ignored, which is why pgk blocked them, from what I can see. I could probably take a person on, but I am not certain I am experienced enough yet, so I would defer to the judgement of others. -- Whereizben - Chat with me - My Contributions13:07, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
He/she seems like an untrustable person for something like this, and when I went to his/her talkpage he/she said that he/she had retired from Wikipedia. Dreamy14:57, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
is this still a problem ? if so we can always have multiple adopters to each adoptee to relieve the amount of work for each of them. Matthew Yeager05:30, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
re: Adoption program
Hi all,
I've been going through the list of users seeking adoption, just kinda browsing it to see what the users are like and such and I've noticed a few things.
There are more than a few users who have had their names on the list for some time, even months!
There are some users who seem to have tons of user boxes (including the adoption box) and few if any other edits.
There are some users with the box who have zero edits and seem to have 'left' WP.
There are some users who have tons of UBX's and tons of edits and seem to have found their own way around.
There are some users who have tons of UBX's, and tons of edits, but their edits are mostly vandalism and/or edits mainly on other user pages
So I was thinking how we might deal with all this and promote the program and help improve WP. I am a great believer in the program because it helped me when I started out here. I think there are many new users who may have much to contribute but are put off by a variety of things such as learning wikimarkup, getting a first edit or article slapped down with abrupt comments (whether intentional or not), or terse references to WP:THIS or WP:THAT, etc. I'm sure you all know what I mean. Adopt-a User is the best system I have seen here to help newbies over the first few months and allow them to become valued contributors.
WP is probably at the point where many of the articles that need to be written are already here and perhaps now we could use the input of people outside the mainstream of the internet, both to write the articles that are in addition to those needed and to help maintain and expand the existing ones.
My mom is 73 and has a wealth of info and references on quilting (history, styles, 'famous people' in the quilting world) and is a great typist and copyeditor, but she wouldn't stand a chance in an AfD debate or edit war, and she is just one example. These people may come here and for a variety of reasons not be encouraged or welcomed and supported. I realize that some of this spills over into civility and other problems, but I see that this program is a place to start. So here are some ideas I have thought of...
Try in the next month to go through all the names on the list and offer adoption or at least find out if they are still interested.
Try to recruit new adopters.
Partner with the Welcoming Committee and Help Desk to promote the adoption program to new users.
I have ideas about all these things and I don't mind being bold but I'm also new here and don't want to be seen as trying to take over or anything like that.
Wikipedia, to me, is a great example of what the WWW was supposed to offer in the way of collaboration and connection between people. Although I'm very new to the program I am a big supporter and plan to be a part of this for a long time and I want to see it grow and become a valued resource. So I want to start a dialog here. I am willing to do much of the work but would like to hear your thoughts and advice on this. Thanks!--killing sparrows (chirp!)06:31, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Look at all the discussions on this talk page. The problem is that no one knows how this is supposed to work. The concept is vague, we're meant to mentor and show new users how to take part and function well on Wikipedia. Most of the program depends on both adopter and adoptee to go and take part in the adoption process, and it doesn't really help when everyone appears to be timid or waiting for the other to pick. It looks like you need to initially know WP:BOLD to take part in this, but that policy is the fundamental part of what one would learn from this. There isn't really a guide or a streamlined way to do this. This needs to be revised thouroughly. - Zero1328Talk?13:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Absolutely. I think our biggest problem is that the "founder" of this program is now indef banned and no one else feels ownership of it. Everyone also seems too timid to assume ownership. I like killing sparrows's ideas; maybe he/she would be willing to take "ownership?" One thing we need is a better description of the adoption process, without ambiguity. Who is responsible for contacting whom, when? If we are going to have people doing some of the tasks described above (contacting "expired" adoptees, recruiting new adopters, etc.), who will that be? What "qualifications" must they have? How often will they perform their duties? How will they be selected?
I don't have the extra time to devote to this, but I propose that someone who does, writes up a set of concrete rules/policies related to Adopt-a-User, and those who are active here can comment on them or tweak them as necessary. When we've come up with something solid, then maybe we can appoint/elect/affirm/whatever someone or several people to be "moderators" of Adopt-a-User, responsible for ensuring that everything is going smoothly.
And I think partnering with the Welcoming Committee/Help Desk is a great idea, but it shouldn't be pursued until we've figured out what we're doing here; otherwise we'll end up with an influx of potential adoptees, and even more confusion.
What do others think of these ideas? Is anyone willing to step up and try to solidify Adopt-a-User? Any thoughts on how/who we should select our moderators/overseers/whatever?
I don't think that it's necessary for anyone to 'own' the Adopt-a-User project. We should be able to come to a consensus about any issues we may have without needing any authority figure to tell us what to do; that's how Wikipedia works, after all.
If you (or anyone else, of course) have any ideas about what things might need changed, by all means, make up a proposal so that we can discuss it. I may even do this myself, after I've read over what instructions we do have. I don't remember having any problems (I just picked a couple of people and offered to adopt them, as far as I remember), but it's possible that the instructions aren't very clear. --Sopoforic17:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, a poor choice of words on my part. When I spoke of "ownership," I meant someone (or several people) who's willing to invest the time to ensure that Adopt-a-User is working well: Matching people up when necessary, weeding out those adoptees who are no longer around, recruiting adopters, etc. Someone who knows what's going on overall with the program, and can confidently answer questions that come up. That's what is lacking right now.
I'm not trying to imply that this program isn't working at all; it is just somewhat disorganized, and I think it could benefit from a little more structure and intentional guidance. As I mentioned above, I don't feel like I have the time to write a proposal right now (although I might in the future), but I would happily welcome any proposal you or anyone else might write. —PurpleRAIN18:55, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
I think what you mean is something like a leader. Like Jimbo, for example. They don't really own it, but they can help guide and advise the community when they need the help. We lost our "leader" a while ago, and even before that he stopped working on this project, so it was left relatively incomplete. We need someone to fill in those shoes. - Zero1328Talk?22:15, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Re Imagining Adopt-a-User
Background
I was adopted by User:Coelacan in February (I think), and with blessings was graduated and have now adopted 5 users. My experience is limited but perhaps reflects what others have had. If not, please point out where your thoughts, experiences and expectations differ.
I asked about a dozen questions over the two months I was in the program. You can see my Q's and Coelacan's A's here.
You can see my current adoptee talk pages here and here
I had no previous experience with WP, not even as a reader. Don't ask me how that happened as I am a true information junkie, although I have spent a good part of the last 5 years doing volunteer work in Nepal. There is Internet access there but it is slow and uncertain and I used it mostly for email. I had previously been pretty active on the web, had a web page, etc. so wikimarkup wasn't a foreign language.
I immediately ran into some issues that I had no idea how to deal with and wanted to learn and ended up in the program and got great, detailed and specific advice. I started hanging out in AfD because I sent some articles there and was then inundated with all the WP:THIS and WP:THAT and so I read the policies and guidelines and looked at the articles nommed and the arguments for and against and picked it all up pretty fast.
I was and am still struck by the in-group atmosphere that prevails here. I am not being critical of anyone or anything except that I see this atmosphere as something that may be discouraging and driving away people who have something to offer WP. I have great respect for and gratitude to those who have built WP, I think this is something that is way bigger and more important than perhaps many of us realize. I admit I am a dreamer and have high expectations of my fellow wo/man, but most of the time when I assume the best of others and let them know it, I find my expectations are met.
The reason I want to be involved with Adopt-a-User is to encourage and support those people who, if assisted a little bit early on, might become useful contributers to this project, and through this project help make this world a better place. That might sound weird or fantastical but I think WP really has the potential to be part of the change the world needs.
I am saying all this to both tell you where I'm coming from and to tell you where I would like to go with Adopt-a-User, and also to show that I have thought about this and am committed to putting in the effort and time to see it through.
That said, here are some thoughts:
I imagine adoptees to fall into several broad categories:
1 Those who sign up on a whim and never or seldom ask questions.
2 Those who are looking for a social experience.
3 Those who are problem users, either before or after signing up.
4 Those who barely get it and need lots of help.
5 Those who get it more or less quickly and become valued members.
I don't want anybody here to waste their time.
Adoptees in group 1 will require little or nothing. I'm not proposing Handhold-a-User
Adoptees in group 2 will need to be reminded what WP is and is not, again little time invested.
Adoptees in group 3 will need to be brought up short, not slapped down. I have seen through talk pages a few users who have reformed and become contributing members, but I am not proposing Fix-a-User.
Adoptees in group 4 will be the most time consuming.
Adoptees in group 5 are the ones that will make it all worthwhile.
The Adopt-a-User program is a privilege, not a right. We are giving our valuable time to these folks because we want to make WP a better place.
Anyone who is disruptive, who wants to chat or vandalizes the project can and should be dropped at the discretion of the adopter. If the adopter is willing to work with them, fine, if not, that is also fine. They are free to request another adoption but we should have a place to list jerks and trolls so that everyone is aware of them.
This is not rehab. If someone is a problem elsewhere, AaU should not be used to counsel them back into the fold. An adopter can take that task on if they choose, but only if they choose.
No anonymous IP's, I think the reasons for being a registered user outwiegh any reasons for not. It also show committment to doing something here.
Other Stuff
I imagine adoption to last about 2 or 3 months, more or less depending on the adoptee.
I can imagine a kind of protocol for adoption, I do an edit analysis by using Interiot's edit counter to get an idea of the adoptees interests, WP usage, 'attitude' (talk page etiquette, any vandalism, edit summary usage, etc.), I don't read it all (Goddess forbid), but 20 minutes spent looking at the data and checking where their most frequent edits are, can tell you alot about the user. This will be less valuable for the newest users obviously, but as you work with someone it can be repeated. You can see how I use it on the first adoption talk page I listed above.
I want this to be easy, I would be willing to develop some standard 'form letters' to use for the most common tasks, such as offering adoption, first contact (which spells out the general process), usual problems (to be determined as we go), etc.
I would favor not actively promoting the program for the first 3-6 months as we develop ideas and put in place the infrastructure.
I don't expect anyone else to have the high-minded ideals that I have and I don't want to assume any ownership of this project. I am willing to do the work and to work with anyone else who has ideas about how we improve this project. I am committed to consensus, I think it's the single most important word in Wikipedia.
I think everything any new user needs to know is already in the WP policies and guidelines and I imagine most of our work to be just pointing the adoptee to those guidelines and having them read them. We may have to explain some things and relate them to specific issues, but those guidelines are the framework here and anyone who wants to be a part of this project has to learn them, use them and abide by them.
Adoption is about the basics. I don't think we should be dealing as a matter of course with how to design templates, infoboxes, or other advanced stuff. Once a user finds their way around and feels comfortable they can learn that stuff somewhere else. This is not to say that an adopter can't help with that, just that that is not our real focus.
Adopters need to be patient, gentle and civil. As I mentioned above, there can be a jargon-laden terseness to WP that we want to provide a transition to. Everybody needs to jump off or even be pushed off the dock at some point, but not from forty feet above the Bering Sea in January. (Been there, done that, but never again!)
There are many parts of this that I can do and I'm willing to do, but there are things I can't do and others will have to do. I can't design templates and don't want to learn. I don't know how to make a chronolist for adoptees. I'm sure other things will come to me or be pointed out.
I do have the time for the next year to put alot of effort into this but life is uncertain and anything can happen.
Well, that's a lot to read, so I'm going to try to summarize a few of the things that I want to respond to:
Adopt-a-User is not a social endeavour: Agree, to an extent. We aren't here just to chat with, but I think that the main thing that makes this useful is that it provides new users with a single person that they can become familiar with, and so feel comfortable asking questions. If all we did was answer questions, we'd be better off promoting the help desk and answering questions there. Of course, we do some things that aren't appropriate for the help desk; personally, I've been asked my opinion of how to improve the tone of an article, and I occasionally look through the recent contribs of my adoptees to see if I have any advice. However, my point stands that making users comfortable asking questions and working in wikipedia is an important part of what we do, so you cannot completely rule out social aspects.
Yes, I agree. My comment was based on looking at the user/talkpage/edit histories of dozens of people on the adoptees list. I notice that there are several who have made few if any constructive edits, they mostly chat back and forth and exchange user boxes with others whom I assume are friends in the real world. My exchanges with coelacan and with one of my adoptees are a little chatty, but in the context of working on articles or discussing WP stuff. I think that this is great , but if I wanted to carry it much further I would switch to email or whatever for that aspect of things.--killing sparrows (chirp!)22:04, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Major problems that we deal with are cryptic policies: This is true. I have answered quite a lot of queries from {{helpme}}, and most have just required me to point to the appropriate policy, along with perhaps a brief summary of the relevant portion. This is the same sort of thing that we may deal with when adopting users.
"we should have a place to list jerks and trolls": Strongly disagree. If a user is a troll, he'll be banned, probably. Anyone who has not been banned has the possibility of contributing positively. Having a list of people you (or we, or anybody) thinks are not worth dealing with, and publicising that list, is a very, very bad idea, in my opinion. Any real problems will be pretty easy to spot by looking at the user's contributions, which I think we should do anyway.
Regarding a chronological listing for people requesting adoption: I made such a thing. See the section "Some thoughts to start with" for more info on that.
My guess is that the majority of both adopters and adoptees are waiting for someone else to make the first move. Would there be some way to write a script or bot that could automatically match potential adoptees with adopters who are willing? Even if actual automation is too difficult or impractical, could we develop a process whereby the two pages are regularly perused and matches are made?
We could still allow people to do things the old way, if they prefer to hand-pick their adoptee/adopter, but maybe have {{autoadoptee}} and {{autoadopter}} templates that would help automate the process? This might also help to deal with the problem of "dangling" adoptees (i.e. those who put up the template and then leave).
Any thoughts? Would my idea work? Does anyone have any suggestions on other ways to match people up?
Does anyone else have the same perception that the majority of people are waiting for something to happen?
Keeping in mind this page, of course. I agree with what PurpleRain said before- both groups are waiting for the other to make the first move. On the AAU home page it kind of outlines the reason- it says that an experienced user will offer adoption, or you can have a look at the adopter status page. Maybe we should just keep one of those? A more 'personalised' adoption will have the adoptees looking at the status page for an adopter that knows about a certain aspect of Wikipedia... thoughts? CattleGirl talk | sign!07:33, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Newbies are like infant babies. Being extremely green, they simply don't know what they need. Even if they know, they cannot tell. If an adoptee is up to the stage that they can tell what he needs, he will know who to find. --Deryck C.04:06, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Snowolf, please do match people, if you're willing. I guess you would need to notify both the adopter and the adoptee that they'd been matched, and let both of them know that either one can opt out if they don't like the match. —PurpleRAIN19:28, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
An adopter provides a person to whom you can go with questions or concerns when you have them. The adopter won't normally do much unless you ask a question or make a comment. If you need help or answers, post a message on your adopter's talk page. If they don't respond, then maybe you need to find someone else to adopt you. —PurpleRAIN18:43, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
I think it'd be better if it was the other way around; you adopting Rat235478683. You have been here far longer than Rat and also appear to have sufficient experience. He also appears to have been leess active since the beginning of this year, and barely meets the recommended criteria for becoming an adopter.[3] - Zero1328Talk?07:14, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
After looking at this project, it appears that a person can just go out and become an adopter without any sort of approval or training. Am I correct in beliveing this is how the process of becoming an adopter is? --Andrew HampeTalk19:38, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
I also see users who've just graduated from the program becoming adopters. I don't think this is good, as they probably still don't have enough experience. --TeckWizParlateContribs@(Lets go Yankees!) 01:47, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree. If you've only just graduated, you probably wouldn't have enough experience to be an adopter yet. I'd say at least a month or two before being allowed to adopt. CattleGirl talk | sign!08:17, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Just throwing out some ideas on the current situation, in no particular order...
I agree that actively seeking new adoptees should wait until the current backlog is cleared. To help clear this backlog I propose drafting a message to all users curently waiting adoption something like this...
Hi There,
The Adopt-a-User program is a relatively new thing on Wikipedia and the participants are trying to improve it and make it a more vigorous program.
If you are still interested in being adopted, great! Leave the box on your user page or go to this page and pick from the list of people offering to adopt. Go to their talk page and tell them you would like to be adopted. There is a box next to each adopter's name indicating if they are currently accepting new adoptees. If you don't receive a response in a day or two, ask someone else from the list.
If you have been here awhile and feel you no longer need adoption please remove the request box from your user page.
If you have any questions or comments about the Adopt-a-User program please go to the project's talk page and let us know your thoughts.
If you have been waiting a long time for adoption, we apologize, we are trying to clear the backlog and improve the program. Wikipedia is an all-volunteer endeavor and new projects like this one take awhile to get going.
Thanks! (sig could be the person leaving the message or a link back to the project page or project talk page)
I am willing to be bold and start leaving this message or something similar on the user pages of those currently on the list if this is acceptable. Anyone wishing to help with that can offer to take a certain section of the alphabet from the current list.
I have left similar, shorter versions of this message on the talk pages of 5 or 6 users on the list, but it's probably too soon to expect results for those.
I also think it would be very helpful to have the waiting list organized chronlogically in addition to or instead of alphabetically so that requests can be dealt with on a first come-first served basis, but I have no idea how to do that. A chronolist would also help select nonresponsive users for a follow-up message after a period of time that would remove them from the list by us removing the request box from their user page after perhaps one more 'gentle prodding,' with a final message explaining why we were removing them and giving them the option to rerequest at any future time.
I will post additional ideas/thoughts about the project in the coming days but I think clearing the backlog should be the first thing we do. To assist with that we might each contact one other experienced user and ask if they would like to become adopters and encourage them to add themselves to the adopters table. --killing sparrows (chirp!)19:41, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
The message you suggest to people on the waiting list is a very good idea - it might reduce the backlog, or at least prompt people into making a request. It can easily be added to talk pages using AWB, I would have thought, to save too much manual labour. As for the excellent idea chronological listing, the idea has been raised before, including Wikipedia talk:Adopt-a-User/Archive 1#Waiting for adoption where various suggestions were made e.g. fixing the template to include a date stamp. Whether we could generate a chronological list in this way, or whether we'd get a "category by month" in the same way that maintenance templates with date stamps generate Category:Articles needing a coat of paint from April 2007 etc, I'll leave to those who know more about template code than I do. Another suggestion was getting a bot to help - again, outside my expertise! Bencherlite20:33, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
I made up a template that will order people based on when they put it on their pages. If you do {{subst:User:Sopoforic/Sandbox4}} it will put the adoptme template (actually, my modified version of it) on your userpage and use the timestamp as a sort key; thus, people will be listed in the category under the '2' heading, ordered with oldest-request-first. Someone with more knowledge of templates could probably make this nicer, but it seems functional to me. Let me know what you think of it; if it seems good, we can move it into template space and direct people to use it when desiring adoption. --Sopoforic10:10, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Yep, that works for me. I was having a go yesterday at something similar, trying to get a template that created categories by month. However (a) I couldn't! and (b) your system is neater in that it would put everyone on the same page and in strict chronological order, whereas just sorting by month wouldn't tell you whether someone had been waiting 1 day or 30 days. (And the thought of creating categories by day... far too tiresome!). Suggestion: we could just tweak the existing template to this format (as it won't have been subst'd by anyone). This will "freeze" the current list (albeit one that doesn't sort users by how long they've been waiting, but that's no different to now) and then new users will just join the bottom of the list. Thoughts? Bencherlite10:34, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, of course I created this just by tweaking the existing one--it took me about five minutes, counting reading the help pages. The way this works is that there are two templates: one which contains the userbox and stuff, and takes the sortkey for the category as a parameter; the other, which is meant to be substed, and generates the timestamp to be used as a parameter. This means that in order for this to work, you need to make a second template (call it adopt or something) that you direct users to subst on their user pages, which will then take care of everything. This ought to preserve the current template, and require minimal changes. I'll give this a day or so, and if no objections are raised, I'll prepare an 'official' template for use. Of course, any suggestions will be greatly appreciated. --Sopoforic10:40, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I think I understand both your improvement of my suggestion and your explanation as to why my suggestion wouldn't work! I'd overlooked the need to subst your template to get the date fixed. How about we change killing sparrows' message slightly as follows? We then get a list of willing adoptees in the order that they react to the message. Bencherlite10:53, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
If you are still interested in being adopted, great! It would help us keep track of who is still waiting if you went to your user page and replaced {{adoptme}} with {{subst:adoptme}}. Also, you can go to this page and pick from the list of people offering to adopt.
Well, it wouldn't work quite like that. We'd have two choices: rename the current template to something like {{dated adoptme}}, as with {{dated prod}}, and use {{adoptme}} for the main one intended for substing; or, make a second template ({{adoptme2}} or such) for substing and leave {{adoptme}} alone. If we choose the first option, we will need to go through every user requesting adoption and make the change (AWB can probably do this). If me choose the second option, we won't have to do anything but point new users to the newer template. So, I'd go with just making a new template and silently modifying {{adoptme}} to support it. --Sopoforic11:04, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, Sopoforic, nobody else seems to have a view (and they've had 2 days to express it) so I'm with you on this one. Go for it! Bencherlite15:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Would I make a good adopter? I'm just curious to see maybe a few opinions since I only joined here in February, but I'm closing in on 2000 edits, and addicted to WP. Evilclown9315:32, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
If you are interested in becoming an adopter, I would love to speak with you. Please message me on my talk page if you are still interested. I have an adopted user who we can both help out! This way the user can have two members helping him and you can learn the ropes at the same time ! Matthew Yeager06:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
ADOPTEES
I have successfully woken up the adoptees, they are pumped and ready to learn. If you wish to adopt a user please contact me on my talk page... I have plenty for everyone :P Matthew Yeager16:43, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, but (according to your userpage) you've also adopted 13 people - is that wise? Can you cope? Our existing guidelines say "Adopters should only take on as many Adoptees as they can practically cope with." For example, one detailed question I had the other night took me the best part of an hour to research and compose a reply, making sure I had the guidance right and (because it was a question about how to format footnotes, references etc) making sure I had the format right both in the text and the "<nowiki><nowiki/>" version displayed as an example. Don't underestimate what you are doing, please. Bencherlite16:58, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
I have decided to participate in this as an adopter, but now it seems there are no adoptees waiting because Matthew Yeager is claiming them all. My thoughts on the scheme are that we shouldn't have to apply through him, or for him to offer adoption to all waiting then farm them off onto other adopters. That doesn't put him in a particularly good light as far as being a 'parent' goes in my opinion... –MDCollins (talk) 18:03, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Oh - they've appeared again, maybe that's my mistake, or I looked during a change over period. Apologies if I have made any errors - I apologize to Matthew Yeager in particular for blaming him for something he hasn't done. Also, if he is keen an willing to mentor 13 adoptions, that is his business, not mine. –MDCollins (talk) 18:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
It was my mistake. I was modifying a template and made a mistake--but since categories don't update immediately, I didn't notice. I've since fixed it. I apologize for the inconvenience. --Sopoforic18:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
I think Matthew might be willing to hand off a few of his adoptees. I don't think he expected such an enthusiastic response. If you want to pick up one or two, go to his talk page and ask him. This was a case of well-intentioned over-enthusiasm.--killing sparrows (chirp!)19:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Indeed, my intention was not to take all teh adoptees, and believe me there are PLENTY waiting. I was just generating some response and activity with the adoptees. You do not have to apply to get an adoptee through me, i was merely saying if you are looking for an active user to adopt, i know a few. now, you dont have to go leave countless messages to inactive users. If you wish to take a few adoptees from me, please do! if you are inexperienced and want to share a few adoptees, please do! I'm not trying to do anything except wake up the adoptees and find out who is active and who isnt. there was not place for me to say "if you are active go here" so instead i said if you are active, shoot me a message. the adoptees that have messaged me is because none of you have messaged them so far. that is not my fault. please have good faith, i'm not trying to do anything crazy. and if no one takes adoptees and I am to keep the ones i have, that is fine... I will devote the necessary time to them as appose to editing or PRC, its not a problem. i feel that they had no one to ask questions to, so now they at least have one person. i do understand the amount of time it takes to be an adopter, as i was answering questions last night and reviewing the work that an adoptee was doing and giving him feedback on everything he has done so far. I am merely asking for adopter's to help me out if they wish too. if you have any questions ask me, dont just think that i'm doing things in the worst way. Matthew Yeager20:26, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Don't worry, I was assuming good faith. However, before you start complaining that none of us had messaged them, you might have noticed that there was a discussion already going on further up the page here about sending out a message to waiting adoptees, and what it would say and who would say to contact. People knew that there was a backlog and were trying to work out the best way of moving forwards. Instead of contributing to that, you were ultra-bold and acted off your own bat. You may, of course, have missed this discussion, but I think you'd agree that, in hindsight, (a) you might have mentioned what you were planning to do first (as, dare I say, there are more experienced people than you who are adopters) and (b) nominating yourself as the point of contact was not the best of ideas. I would offer to take one or two off your hands myself, but I will be away for two weeks starting at the weekend, which renders it rather pointless for now. Anyway, I suppose at least something has been done - consensus-building is necessary, but does sometimes take time! Bencherlite20:41, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
(edit conflict with Bencherlite)
It is just possible that this is partly in response to my message on your talk page, so I'll respond.
The issue I had was that you told people that if they wanted to be adopted they should contact you, which means that lots of them are going to you thinking that you are offering to adopt all 50 or so of them. If you'd read the discussion above you'd see that we were working out a nice way that potential adoptees could show that they were still interested, without having them all sending a message to one person or something.
These things aside, I have reservations about your ability to handle a bunch of adoptees since you only made your first contribution two weeks ago. I don't mean to disparage you, it just worries me that you might get a huge influx of people asking you for help, and be unable to handle them all. The reason that none of us had sent messages to many of those people was because there aren't enough of us to handle them all at once--that isn't going to change just because you sent a bunch of messages out.
Hm, I'm not sure on whether I should laugh or cry. The irony is clear, but it's sad to see that he didn't practice what he preached. - Zero1328Talk?08:39, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
If a user only had a few edits on wikipedia, but a significant amount on another wikimedia project and had an in depth knowledge of wikipedia policy would they be able to adopt? I see the list of users wanting to be adopted is quite large and there would appear to be a shortage of adopters. I would like to help out, the only thing that would stop me is my relatively little amount of edits on this project. Would the comunity mind me helping out by adopting, or would they feel more comfortable if i waited until i had more edits under my belt on this particular wikimedia project? ThirtyNineHundredTalkCont21:41, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, I would guess that since we're the biggest Wikipedia, we probably have the most policies (that others don't) and things like that. I would say wait a little to learn about this Wikipedia. --TeckWiz is now RParlateContribs@(Let's go Yankees!) 00:38, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
There's only one "Wikipedia", so that means we're the biggest. I think experience from another Wikimedia project is fine, I'd say the minimum you'd need to check up on would be being a bit familiar with differences in policy between Wikis, so you can direct the adopted person towards them. They should be generally the same, though. - Zero1328Talk?00:47, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Ah, no. There are lots of Wikipedias. This is the English Wikipedia. That aside: I won't offer an opinion on whether it would be appropriate to adopt, but I will note that you should be sure you're familiar with WP:FUC and our processes (WP:AFD, etc.) before adopting, since those do differ between wikis. --Sopoforic03:03, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
As I've learned in my short venture into the fr.wikipedia, even though I'm an administrator here and have a pretty solid understanding of process here, and while a lot of that is transferable, my very first act to try and fix a duplicate article didn't fit the way things are done there (thankfully they were very gentle with me and sorted out my erroneous listing :). Their copyright policy is also somewhat different as it has to meet French, not US, copyright requirements, etc. Orderinchaos07:43, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
I do not demand respect, I respect others as much as they respect me. Yet I am one to earn respect through my actions. I think its unfair to assume that one is not capable of certain things merely because of the length of time they have been on Wikipedia (its not like i'm new to the world :P). Anyways... the update...
Despite popular assumptions on how things would go, everything is going awesome! adoptees are awake and getting their needed attention and at the same time, adopters have been able to locate the active adoptees and take some under their wing. Maybe we can keep some kind of activity time frame ?! for example, since i have posted on nearly every adoptees page we can revisit that and see how long has gone by... and maybe after 2 weeks we can call the person 'inactive' leave them a nice message asking for them to return to us and then remove their userbox. I really dont think the backlog is how it is... I think more then 75% of it are inactive... what do you guys think ? Matthew Yeager23:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, the point of this project is to provide adopters who are experienced with wikipedia, and length of time spent here is a good indicator of that. However, it's not just that you haven't been here for long: I wouldn't be at all certain that I myself would be capable of handling 50 or so adoptees, and I've been here for quite a while.
However, I'm glad to hear that it's going well for you. As for removing the userboxes from the inactive users after a while: that seems reasonable to me. If they aren't even here any more, the userboxes are just making the category less useful. Similarly, there are people in the 'users having been offered adoption' category who haven't edited in months; it might be appropriate to remove those as well, since that category will just keep growing as well. Let me know what you think. --Sopoforic13:41, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree; I've already de-offered one offeree who never replied and am about to de-adopt someone who's not edited for two months since being adopted (freeing me up for more adoptees!) I've also boldly made some change to the text above the list of people seeking adoption here to suggest that would-be adopters discuss with "too-experienced" adoptees whether they'd be better off with Editor review or Editor assistance than a scheme designed for "new and inexperienced users". That might cut down the backlog too. See what you think and change at will. Bencherlite
Adopter Gone Incommuncado!
Hey guys, I am relatively new user and have been working with my adopter on a certain project. It had to do with an AfD and posting of a new article and all the jazz. They have been extremely helpful up until the past few weeks when they went completely incommunicado. Any ideas on what I should do? Should I get a new Adopter? I'd like to finish this project up as soon as possible. Thanks everyone. Julieatrci16:21, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, it seems that Lethaniol has indeed been away for a week or so. If you'd like, you can direct any questions you have to me until he returns. Of course, you are free to request another adopter if you'd like to do that, as well. --Sopoforic17:02, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Anybody got some AWB?
Hey there, I was wondering if we should send a message to all the folks listed as adopters and let them know that we are looking for input on the program. I looked at the program page and talk page history and see that there are several people who have been involved in the past that haven't weighed in on the ideas we've floated. I don't want to bypass anyone who has an interest and possible input. Just something simple that lets them know there is some new activity. Something like...
Hi there,
The Adopt-a-User program is looking for new ideas and input on the program. If you are still interested please stop by the talk page and read some of the ideas being floated and give a comment. If you want to update or change your information on the adopter's list page, now would be a great time! Thanks!
I don't have AWB and really don't want to go through the list manually. If nobody speaks up I'll probably request AWB, I've been meaning to do that for awhile and just haven't gotten around to it. Thanks!--killing sparrows (chirp!)22:03, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
But doesn't the cat link mostly to user pages since that's where the ubx is? We don't want the messages on their user pages. I don't think you can do it with AWB. --TeckWiz is now RParlateContribs@(Let's go Yankees!) 22:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, your message got to me at least. I'm a relatively new adopter - and to my surprise I rapidly got three adoptees. Two of the three are essentially idle - is this par for the course? It would be nice to get some advice on how to spur them into action. Some pages of advice from experienced adopters - even just in rough note format would be very welcome for us new adopters. SteveBaker04:03, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
I have 5 adoptees and only two have asked any questions so I'd say your experience may be typical. Take a look at my adoption talk page here which has links to each adoptee's dedicated page. You can see the 'edit review' that I do for each adoptee on the pages I've set up for each of them. I don't know that it is necessary to 'spur' them. I think the edit review I do gives a good indication of what areas they may need help. I suppose in a few months I might do another review and drop them a line if there is no activity and perhaps ask if they still feel the need for mentoring.--killing sparrows (chirp!)05:20, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
What now?
Hi, I just adopted somebody, and I want to know what to do next. Please reply as quick as you can. Thanks!--CJKing23:33, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
this question should have been asked before the adoption of a user :P I think we should move towards a reveiw committee or something for the acceptance of adopters. nothing big, but enough so we know that they know what they are doing! Matthew Yeager05:43, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Matthew, there should be some kind of review process before users can be adopters. Perhaps there should be a consensus like AfD or RfA (though certainly with a little less scrutiny). I think it is crucial that adopters have some kind of familiarity with WP:MOS and the five pillars. Were this system in place, it would be much easier to create a auto-adopt feature that would streamline the whole process of adoption, and we could avlid problems like this. - HammerHeadHuman(talk)(work)18:26, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Adoption Revised
Hello All, I've made some efforts to clean up the AAU program and have some ideas to share.
First, my efforts already. I have gone through the ENTIRE LIST of adoptees.
If they have been banned or are no longer in need of an adoption I have removed their tag.
I have found several adoptees who have been on the list for a great time and have not received a message about adoption or from anyone! with this i have messaged everyone on the list who had not previously been contacted. My plan is not to adopt everyone on the list, but to instead get some activity going.
Ideas
I think work should be started with a couple users joining in with killing sparrows to create some standard forms for messages. (welcome, explanation of the program, filling complaints, etc.)
Secondly i like the automation of the set up of matching adopters \ adoptees, I'm glad that is already moving forward.
I think we should set up a committee for AAU. Not to have someone in charge, but to have like 5-7 people so that everyone knows who they can contact if they need help both adopter and adoptee. Have a user to address any concerns with the bot on there, someone with the welcoming \ forms section, and some overall leaders of this program.
I would like to see this committee start regulating the process in which AAU happens.
Create an approval system to become an adopter (nothing big at all just so we know they understand what this is and is not and to ensure that they know how to help new users)
On this topic, I think that new adopters should first work with an experienced adopter, sharing an adoptee before taking on their own adoptee.
Make a standard to review current adopters \ complaint review system.
remove the back log of users seeking adoption.
I hope to hear everyones comments on this and hopefully we can change some things, add other idea and get this program back on its feet on way or another!
As for me, I'm very excited about this!!! tomorrow i'll be contacting all the adopters listed, in hopes that they will update their status and come back to help out! after a week or so we'll have a good idea of who is active in this group and what we have to work with.
I dont mean to seem to forward about this, i'm just very excited. at the same time i understand this changes wont happen over night, I just want to make sure they get started. good luck, Matthew Yeager13:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your work so far. You've got some useful ideas and some energy too, which is great! However, I don't think that a "committee" to run AAU or an approval system for new adopters are good ideas. Firstly, Wikipedia runs on consensus: editors discuss issues and come to an overall view on the best way forward. We may have editors who take more of an interest in what goes on at AAU compared to, say, WP:AFD, but that shouldn't mean that there needs to be "people in charge" even if that's not what we call them. :I don't have a problem with people volunteering to be on a list of people to contact with questions or problems, as long as they (and the rest of us) know that they're not the bosses.
Secondly, and linked to my worry about the approval system, it sounds bureaucratic, one of the "Nots" that Wikipedia isn't - see WP:BURO. I don't know how often, if ever, you look at the "Miscellany for deletion" page, but the discussions going on right now at WP:MFD#Wikipedia:Wikihalo and WP:MFD#Wikipedia:Barnstar and award proposals shows how many people react to "instruction creep" or worse. We don't want AAU going the way of the big red delete button!
I think we could do with agreeing a slightly more detailed set of criteria for adopters - not just edit counts and number of months editing, but also questions for them to consider and judge themselves against (rather than being judged against them by others) before signing up: e.g., do they consider that they sufficiently understand the criteria for / process for deletion (speedy/PROD/AfD), both initiating and objecting? Do they consider that they sufficiently understand the need for citing reliable sources and how to do it, etc? Could they demonstrate examples of likely issues from their own contribution history if asked by a user? Of course, no-one is going to know every bit of WP backwards and if we set the bar too high to become an adopter, nobody will do so. But if (on my suggested approach) someone thinks that they can answer "yes" to enough questions to be comfortable and they think that they would make a good adopter, that would be good enough for me, with the usual assumption of good faith. Of course, if there are problems with an adopter, an adoptee can always change parents, but I don't think we need a formal complaints system - that again sounds a bit committee-ish, and I'm already bored of committees in real life without generating more for WP!
Either for the purpose of new criteria and / or because it would be useful anyway, we could perhaps do with a list of points that adoptees often raise / FAQs - this could be usefully based on actual experience of current adopters. For example, I was asked about the differences between references, footnotes and external links. Others may have been asked about how to write an article about a band that doesn't get speedily deleted for lack of notability. You get the idea. Anyway, that's quite enough from me for now. Bencherlite15:00, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
I essentially agree with you on all of these points, I think. As for having a list of people to contact with questions, though, I think it would be better just to have a project subpage, if anything. This page is the place to ask questions about the program; the help desk is the place to ask questions about wikipedia when you're unsure. I'm not sure I see any benefit at all to having yet another place to ask either of those kinds of questions, but perhaps there's something I'm missing.
I also agree than any evaluation should really be self-evaluation. e.g., "This is a list of things you probably ought to know to adopt. If you think you know them, go for it. Else, you should probably get some more experience."
A list of commonly asked questions would probably serve well as a 'list of things you probably ought to know,' so I think that's fine. Perhaps we ought to just work together to put together a sort of cheat-sheet with the very common guidelines/policies on it. I seem to recall there being something like that already, but if not, we could make one. Let me know what you think. --Sopoforic15:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
I think some kind of approval system might be warranted. Wikipedia:VandalProof has an approval system, because use of that tool could provide vandals with the tools to do a lot of damage. Similarly, someone who wants to cause damage to Wikipedia could do a lot more by adopting a half-dozen users and intentionally misinforming them about Wikipedia policy. It could provide a vandal with their own "army" of "brainwashed" vandals.
On a less sensational note, I can see some relatively unknowledgeable people signing up to be adopters just for the "prestige," or the feeling that they're with the "in-crowd" in Wikipedia. That could be detrimental as well, kind of like the blind leading the blind. They would be unable to effectively advise their adoptees, and would hamper the program.
I don't know if we need official "approval," but some sort of validation might be in order, instead of everyone and their dog being able to sign up.
I understand the reasoning, but there are a couple of issues: first, we aren't really in a position to stop someone from adopting if they are intentionally going to cause harm--we might never know about it; second, we would definitely not want to have unreasonable standards, because we can use all the help we can get. If you could think of a way to address these, I'd be happy to hear about it.
And, not specifically replying to PurpleRain, but regarding my 'cheat sheet' proposal, we do have WP:QUICK, WP:CHEAT, and User:John Broughton/Editor's Index to Wikipedia which serve this purpose to an extent. WP:CHEAT is about wiki formatting, and isn't quite what we need; WP:QUICK is more of a guide for readers, sort of; the editor's index is much more what we're looking for, but it's pretty big. Both the editor's index and WP:CUTS will show pretty much all you need, but they are too big to be manageable. A brief search didn't turn up anything else, so we may want to make up a short page with useful links on it. --Sopoforic15:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
(ec)Someone running amok with Vandalproof can cause a lot of damage; similarly WP:AWB is powerful in the wrong hands - misusing either will cause other people time and effort to revert, as you can affect many pages in a 5 minute spell of malice. An adopter running amok won't do the same damage - the pace will be much slower for a start, plus it's likely that any "non-policy" / vandalistic editing by the adoptee will be noted and reverted, and a comment/warning issued, before any real problems arise. The guidance to adoptees could say that if you receive a warning for something your adopter has told you is OK, you should contact someone (either using {{helpme}} or on an AAU talk page) for an outside view. Chances are that anyone wanting to cause trouble will be unlikely to sign up as an adoptee, and deliberately misinforming adoptees about policy to get them to do naughty things is likely to lead to a community ban for the adopter anyway. I'm not suggesting we remove the existing criteria about no recent bans / blocks for adopters, and we could make it clear that if an adopter gets banned or blocked (for 3RR, vandalism, linkspam or the like) their name can be removed on sight from the scheme by anyone. As for unknowledgeable people signing up, I really don't know whether that's a current problem - perhaps we need to send a different message to all current (and past) adoptees asking for any feedback they have? I don't know how many people (adoptees / adopters) watch this page - not many are contributing to this discussion at the moment, anyway! Bencherlite15:56, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
sorry for the misunderstands... but i in no way am suggesting a committee to govern the AAU. I do like the self evaluation as a good compromise in weeding out not so good adopters. for example when searching through adoptees i found a post left by an adopter that said:
I'm offering to adopt you. I Know some stuff that can help you. Don't expect to learn to much if you accept me to Adopt you.
This is not what we want AAU to be portrayed as. I'm not sayign that adopter should be able to adopt, but if they had some kind of guidance and had to answer some questions and read through what we are about then maybe he would have worded his statement differently and had been better prepared to adopt. Matthew Yeager16:42, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, perhaps we should have a "quiz" of sorts. List 20 carefully selected questions that might be typical of an adoptee, and say, "If you want to be an adopter, you should be able to provide detailed answers to at least x number of these." We wouldn't actually ask for the answers; it would just be a form of self-evaluation. If you realize that you don't know the answers to 90% of the questions, then you're probably not a good candidate for being an adopter.
Another thought - we ought to make it clearer, whatever edit count level we use as a guide(currently 500) that we're not including user and user talk messages in that total - otherwise people can get to 500 very quickly by messing around with userboxes on their user page and / or chatting with their friends. Bencherlite19:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Erm, I think I'll follow what you come up with. It's just, well, there is no "big red delete button". The button is plain grey. --Deryck C.06:13, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Another suggestion
I think the front page needs to be revised a little. What I would consider helpful would be two prominent links: "To adopt, click here," and "To be adopted, click here." These would link to subpages with itemized steps and links explaining exactly how to initiate the process. Currently, one must read over the page to find the pertinent information.
Also, I don't think it's a good idea to offer options: "Alternatively check out the list of Adopters...". We should have exactly one set of instructions for adoptees, and one for adopters. This makes it clear where the onus is at each stage of the process.
Lastly, I think a clear explanation of exactly what adoption is and how it works is needed. What needs does it serve? What questions are appropriate? Maybe a list of questions that would help someone determine if they are a good candidate for adoption/adopting...
I'll try to do some of this myself as I have time, but input from others is welcome and requested as well. —PurpleRAIN15:54, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
This is an excellent idea. A single, visible "steps for adoption" section would probably be much nicer. Currently it's in the same box as the instructions for adopters, which we probably ought to hide behind a link. What do you think of replacing the entire text of the 'Joining' box with just (perhaps in a larger font) "If you wish to be adopted, place {{subst:dated adoptme}} on your user page." --Sopoforic16:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps after the 'To be adopted click here' link, leading to the info about adoption there could be a link 'To pick an adopter, click here' leading to the adopters list. I think seeing the names and brief messages (including availability) is more personal. To some newbies even cut n' pasting the template might be daunting.--killing sparrows (chirp!)16:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
If cutting and pasting the template is too much, I'm not sure that it'll be any easier browsing through the list and contacting someone for adoption. After all, leaving a note on someone's talk page is essentially the same process as leaving a template on your own user page. Perhaps it would be appropriate to have the single-step adoption process, and below it a link with "For more information on adoption, click here," or something like that.
Well, I don't know what would be best. I exhausted my week's supply of wiki-creativity making the dated template thing, and I should really be worrying about my finals instead right now. I'll think about the redesigning idea, and hopefully some others will have brilliant ideas as well, so we'll see what happens. --Sopoforic17:05, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
(ec with Sopoforic again!) I think there is a place for both options - some people may like to look to see who's available and pick someone, others may be shy and may want to be asked. For example, my current adoptee approached me and has stayed in touch well, but two others who accepted an offer of adoption from me have done nothing since... How about "Click here to choose your own adopter (leads to adopters' list) - click here to have an adopter find you (leads to short instruction on how to add subst'd template to your userpage)". (Sopoforic - go and revise for your finals, we'll still be here when you get back. Clear case of finding anything else to do other than revision (or in my case, work)!!!) Bencherlite17:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
I like Bencherlite's suggestion with the two options, it gives the assertive and the shy each a way to go. Those who click to chose their own adoptee will help reduce any potential backlog in the future.--killing sparrows (chirp!)19:02, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
If the adoptee has been inactive for more than 1 month, should the adoptee be considered a "graduate"? Real9606:41, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
If you mean they have not edited for a month I might give them another month, depending on how long they've been on WP. If they just haven't asked any questions for a month, drop them a line and ask if they feel ready for 'graduation'. There are really no hard and fast rules for any of this, which is probably fine. My guess is that most adoptees will ask few, if any, questions, just because most new users will make few, if any, edits. My goal is to give the new editor who may be inexperienced or unsure an avenue to become confident and not be put off by the learning curve. If one out of ten becomes a good editor and makes positive contributions I'll consider it a success. So far I have had to put little time into answering questions. You can check out my adoptee talk pages here to see how I do an initial edit review of new adoptees and answer questions.--killing sparrows (chirp!)07:00, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
I think "graduation" must be something of the adoptee's own conscious consent. If the adoptee does not reply, he or she should never be considered graduated. The adoptee should be considered withdrawn instead. --Deryck C.15:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
The word 'graduation' bothers me in this context - it carries with it some connotation of achievement. It should NEVER be OK for an adoptee to claim "I graduated from adoption by User:XXXX" without XXXX having said they were ready. They can drop out - or be kicked out - or simply fail to do anything in Wikipedia post-adoption - but those shouldn't count as "Graduation". Consider this hypothetical: If I have an adoptee who asks to be adopted by me, I accept, I ask what their interests are - and then everything goes quiet for three months (aside from me occasionally dropping by at their Talk page and asking how they are doing - and checking on their 'Contributions' list - which is just empty except for a few Talk entries)...after that amount of time, I'm not going to say that they've "Graduated" - it reflects badly on me that someone I helped - and whom I claim has "graduated" from the SteveBaker school of WikiGoodness - is so completely useless. So either they remain my adoptee forever (which is no biggie because they have become zero maintenance effort) - or I have to tell them that I'm not going to keep them on my adoptee list and they've "Failed". SteveBaker16:07, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree that 'graduation' is something that should be decided by the adopter, or by some criteria yet to be developed, not by the adoptee or simply through lack of activity. I don't know though about the idea of telling them they've 'failed'. Users who don't take advantage of the program can simply be dropped after a time for inactivity (perhaps after some gentle prodding to take advantage of the program), kept on an adopters list (little effort involved in this as noted above), or, in the case a problem user, (one unresponsive to reminders about vandalism, incivility, whatever) can be told that the adopter feels the user is gaining little from the program, lets them know they are being 'unadopted' by the adopter, and suggests they reapply for adoption in the future if they would like. We don't want to get into disputes about this kind of stuff, especially with a user who may have demonstrated immaturity or incivility.--killing sparrows (chirp!)17:05, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah - I like the term "unadopted" - we should reserve "graduated" for the much hoped-for situation where the adoptee has 'grown' to the point where they simply don't need more advice. Unadopted is better than 'failed' - after all, it could easily have been the adopter's fault. SteveBaker01:43, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
To sum up, I think we can develop two terms for past adoptees: "unadopted" (or "dropped", I like this better) for adoptees who left Wikipedia for, say, three months without a reply; and "graduated" for those who has grown mature and whose progresses in AAU have gone to completion, in a sense upon the consent of both the adoptee and adopter. I think this is our way out. --Deryck C.07:28, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Suggestion
I was wondering if it is possible to add a link to the adoption program in the welcome templates... - TwoOars(T | C)11:19, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
This was discussed above, and it was suggested that we wait until some of the organizational questions around Adopt-a-User have been sorted out, so we don't end up with an influx of new adoptees while we're still figuring out how to make this all work smoothly. —PurpleRAIN15:39, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Would it be possible (or even acceptable) for adoptees to develop personal EOCs (end of course exam) for adoptees based on what they have been taught? Or maybe even having a standard ADOPT EOC for adoptees if the adopter doesn't feel like creating one? ~Magnus animum âµ â«Ïγ11:41, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, that's what I was trying (but obviously failed) to say. Nothing on the !EOC should be something that an adopter has not taught his or her adoptee. ~Magnus animum âµ â«Ïγ11:45, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Well I think it's acceptable if the things "not taught by the adopter" is something that can be found out by searching Wikipedia. --Deryck C.06:57, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Thus I think it's more essential for the adopter to teach the adoptee how to apply the rules. Then an EOC has a meaning. --Deryck C.14:33, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I don't see the adoption program as some kind of organized classroom thing, but more as providing new users with someone they can ask questions of. I mean, I do occasionally look through my adoptees' contributions and make suggestions, and of course when asked questions I answer and provides links to relevant policies, but I don't go 'today we will learn about templates.'
That said, do you (anyone) think that we should have some sort of organized teaching of concepts? If so, then it'd be much more efficient to do it en masse than individually (e.g. by sending out weekly 'lessons' to all adoptees, or something). Perhaps this is something that should be considered, but otherwise I think that expecting any particular set of things to have been taught is not really appropriate. --Sopoforic19:10, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't know if there need be any formal curriculum or graduation process for this program. When I asked questions (as an adoptee) I got pretty detailed answers and pointers to the relevent policies and guidelines. When I am asked questions I try to give a good answer and also point to the WP:THIS and WP:THAT pages that contain more detail. I tell adoptees and others who ask questions that there is really no other way to learn the in's and out's of WP.
When I felt ready for graduation it was because I knew what pages to look at and simply didn't have many questions that I couldn't find the answers for. I asked my adopter if they thought I was ready for adoption and they agreed I was.
Then we have the same opinion of how this ought to work, which is nice. What I was asking above wasn't so much whether we should have a formal classroom or lessons, as whether it would be useful to the adoptees generally to have weekly(-ish) notes with descriptions of common guidelines/policies (what is afd? csd? rfa? point?). It was my feeling that this wouldn't be very useful, since the adoptees will have vastly varies experiences with wikipedia, but I thought I ought to ask and see what people felt. --Sopoforic20:34, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
No, there is no definite, or even organized curriculum here. Everything in the mentorship should be customary. It is a decision, or bargain, between the adopter and the adoptee. It was just Magnus Animum asking whether it would be suitable if an adopter includes an EOC in the curriculum. The EOC is not going to apply to everyone. Especially not to those adoptions where either the adopter or the adoptee doesn't feel like to. --Deryck C.02:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree that there shouldnt been mandated "classes" or information you have to teach your adoptee. BUT i do think we should put together some sample questions and answers so that both the adoptee can see what this program is about and what type of questions are customary as well as giving new adopters a feel for what they can expect and what is customary in answering their questions. i've seen this needed on both sides... adoptees sit and have no idea what questions to ask or where to begin... and i've seen adopters who just sit there and answer every question with a link, no explanation, just a link. whatcha guys think ? i'd be willing to put together some q & a examples if that would make what i'm proposing easier to understand ? Matthew Yeager03:09, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Above, somewhere, we were talking about whether it would be nice to have an FAQ or cheat sheet for the adopters/adoptees, with the most common questions and most important guidelines. I do think that this could be nice, although we'd want to keep it very short. Anything the typical adoptee wouldn't want to read through in a single sitting would probably be too much, in my opinion. So, if you want to start such a thing, please do! I at least will be happy to help with it. I look forward to seeing what you come up with. --Sopoforic20:34, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, I think the best way is that if the adoptee doesn't ask questions for a long time, the adopter should check their contributions and ask them questions. I mean, the adopter asks questions voluntarily. Based on the adoptee's contribs. --Deryck C.06:23, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Regular Chores:
* Update the list of Adopters checked against criteria.
with adopters being linked... when i clicked it went to a users subpage for him checking new adopters ?!?!?! User:Lethaniol/Adopters
is this the current accepted way to do this, that has been agreed on by the consensus ?
Yeah, pretty much. It was back in December. The archive has the details, if you want to read it. Although, Lethaniol seems to be on hiatus at the moment, so I guess that this isn't happening right now. --Sopoforic12:14, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, this was a while ago- when there were few enough adopters to actually do this (some adopters had VERY few edits), but now we seem to be well past that stage. CattleGirl talk | sign!09:15, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
what do we all feel like doing as an alternative, as its the current link displayed on that page... which means some users may be visiting it and therefore gaining incorrect or old information. any thought ? MatthewYeager04:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
Co-Adopting
I was thinking of adopting, though I would like to start with a co-adopter who is fairly experienced in this program. Would anybody be able to help? Greeves(talk ⢠contribs ⢠reviews)17:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
In my experience, interaction with adoptees mostly consists of answering questions they ask you, so I'm not certain what you mean by co-adoption. However, if you mean that you want someone to ask if an adoptee should stump you with a question, I'm sure that you'll find ample help by posting at the help desk, if you need a quick answer; or, if you prefer, and if you don't mind waiting for a few hours, you may feel free to post questions on my talk page as well. If you want someone who would take a more active role, perhaps someone else here will volunteer. --Sopoforic05:41, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
If it comes to co-adopting, it'll look like WP:AC, which teaches more sophisticated use of Wikipedia. Which is something we aren't designated to give through this program. --Deryck C.15:42, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
If you want to look at the list of Adopters who are ready, willing and able to help new Adoptees, you can check out the list here, and if you find one you like, you can just contact them on their talk page.
If you want to wait to be asked, then just edit your user page and add this: {{subst:dated adoptme}}. This adds you to the list of people seeking to be adopted, and before long (we hope!) an experienced user will come along and offer to adopt you.
This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
