CZ Talk:Managing Editor/2010/004 - Simplification of application procedure

Initial thoughts

Daniel has invited me to chime in on this.

I think the signup procedure currently is too convoluted and is probably putting off applicants.

With generalist wikis, a lot of people sign up just to correct a very minor mistake or as a one-off thing. They spot a comma out of place and just want to fix that. We ought to encourage this.

1. We should get a copywriter to rewrite the text to make it shorter, more encouraging and so on. Change the language from "requirement", "you are required to do this" etc. to a less strict tone.
2. We should use A/B testing to compare various versions of the signup page.
3. We shouldn't ask people whether they are authors or editors at initial signup: once they are signed up, offer them the chance to upgrade their account to editor if they are qualified.
4. Just have a spot for people to dump in URLs.
5. We should do some "guerilla user testing" to see where in the form we can improve it.

That seems like it might get us on the right track. –Tom Morris 17:14, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

We currently also require that the new user appear to have a good command of the english language. D. Matt Innis 01:24, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I notice in Tom's list above the suggestion that people be able to join to make a small change in something that they read. I agree this is probably the single biggest feature that might get us more applications, and more users that will stick around. D. Matt Innis 01:30, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I currently make my living editing technical papers written in English by Chinese. I could try the "copywriting" mentioned above. Where is the text?

Can we make it some sort of multi-step process?

1. Signup is extremely simple. Give us your name and a email address. Welcome to Citizendium!
2. New users get some suggestions including putting a biography on their user page and joining workgroups they are interested in.
3. Becoming an editor is a separate process. I'd say no-one should be given that privilege until they have shown competence, and understanding of basic policies, on the wiki, but that's another issue.

Provided some of us check recent changes, and in particular look at what new users are up to, and the Constables are moderately alert to intervene if a problem appears, I see no problem with making registration really easy. Sandy Harris 05:01, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

@Matt, I added the command of English as a separate item (even though I think it has not been enforced lately). As for allowing small changes in something people read, the simplest options to allow that would be to enable IP contributions or to set up an account with public password, possible restricted to editing talk namespaces. Not sure how the password can be fixed for such an account, though.

@all, I made it clear that the table is to be edited directly, so as to have all relevant comments in the right place.

@Sandy, the text is distributed across several pages in the Mediawiki namespace (e.g. MediaWiki:Requestaccount-text; Matt has compiled most of it here once, but that was two years ago), in which you and I cannot edit. So it is perhaps best to just copy the source code and to simplify it elsewhere (e.g. on CZ:Managing Editor/2010/004 - Simplification of application procedure/Working copy).

For an example of a signup page that I consider close to what we need, see here.

--Daniel Mietchen 08:53, 11 April 2011 (UTC)