From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[ edit ]
How long have you been a Wikimedia contributor?
0% did not select an option [?]
1 – Less than 1 year (2.21%) 2 – 1 to 2 years (6.62%) 3 – 2 to 5 years (17.65%) 4 – More than 5 years (73.53%)
Three-quarters of survey participants reported being a contributor for more than five years.
[ edit ]
Which gender do you identify with?
0% did not select an option [?]
1 – Male (79.41%) 2 – Female (11.76%) 3 – Non-binary / third gender (0.74%) 4 – Prefer not to say (8.09%)
Almost 80% of participants identify as male.
[ edit ]
Which region do you usually edit from?
0% did not select an option [?]
1 – North America (62.50%) 2 – Western Europe (22.79%) 3 – Oceania (6.62%) 4 – Asia (4.41%) 5 – Sub-Saharan Africa (2.94%) 6 – Other (0.74%)
More than 85% of participants are from North America or Western Europe.
[ edit ]
How often have you reported incidents to AN/I in the last 12 months?
0% did not select an option [?]
1 – Never (32.35%) 2 – Once or twice (46.32%) 3 – Between 3 and 10 times (18.38%) 4 – More than 10 times (2.94%)
Almost one-third of survey participants had not reported an incident to AN/I in the past year.
[ edit ]
How often have you been an uninvolved participant in discussions on AN/I in the last 12 months?
0.74% did not select an option [?]
1 – Never (22.96%) 2 – Once or twice (25.93%) 3 – Between 3 and 10 times (28.89%) 4 – More than 10 times (22.22%)
More than three-quarters of participants had been an uninvolved participant at AN/I in the past year.
[ edit ]
How often have you been involved in an incident reported on AN/I in the last 12 months?
0% did not select an option [?]
1 – Never (27.94%) 2 – Once or twice (46.32%) 3 – Between 3 and 10 times (20.59%) 4 – More than 10 times (5.15%)
Almost three-quarters of survey participants reported being involved in an incident reported on AN/I in the last 12 months.
[ edit ]
In the last 12 months, how often have you been admonished or sanctioned as a result of being involved in an incident that was reported to AN/I?
0% did not select an option [?]
1 – Never (89.71%) 2 – Once or twice (9.56%) 3 – Between 3 and 10 times (0.74%) 4 – More than 10 times (0%)
Almost 90% of survey participants have not been admonished or sanctioned as a result of being involved in an incident that was reported to AN/I in the last 12 months.
[ edit ]
How often did you visit AN/I to follow or read about reports on incidents that do not involve you in the last 12 months?
0.74% did not select an option [?]
1 – Never (7.41%) 2 – Once or twice (9.63%) 3 – Between 3 and 10 times (22.96%) 4 – More than 10 times (60.00%)
Three in five survey participants visited AN/I to follow or read more than ten reports on incidents that did not involve them in the last 12 months.
[ edit ]
On a scale of 1-5, how satisfied are you with the way reports are handled on AN/I?
1.47% did not select an option [?]
1 – Dissatisfied (24.63%) 2 – (19.40%) 3 – (29.10%) 4 – (21.64%) 5 – Very satisfied (5.22%)
Almost a quarter of survey participants are dissatisfied with the way reports are handled on AN/I – but more than a quarter are satisfied or very satisfied with it.
[ edit ]
Have you ever disagreed with an AN/I outcome, such as the wrong person being sanctioned?
1.47% did not select an option [?]
1 – Never (6.62%) 2 – Rarely (29.41%) 3 – Sometimes (46.32%) 4 – Frequently (16.18%)
More than six in ten participants reported "sometimes" or "frequently" disagreeing with the outcomes of cases at AN/I.
[ edit ]
How often, in general, would you say the following statements apply to discussion on AN/I? — The closing result to a report on AN/I is too harsh.
3.68% did not select an option [?]
1 – Almost never (13.74%) 2 – Rarely (43.51%) 3 – Sometimes (33.59%) 4 – Often (7.63%) 5 – Almost always (1.53%)
Less than one in ten of those who responded said that the closing result of a report on AN/I "often" or "almost always" too harsh, while more than half said that the result is "almost never" or "rarely" too harsh.
[ edit ]
How often, in general, would you say the following statements apply to discussion on AN/I? — The closing result to a report on AN/I is not harsh enough.
3.68% did not select an option [?]
1 – Almost never (6.87%) 2 – Rarely (29.01%) 3 – Sometimes (41.98%) 4 – Often (18.32%) 5 – Almost always (3.82%)
62.12% of those who responded said that the closing result of cases at AN/I is "sometimes", "often", or "almost always" not harsh enough.
[ edit ]
How often, in general, would you say the following statements apply to discussion on AN/I? — Threads typically stay on AN/I for the appropriate length of time.
3.68% did not select an option [?]
1 – Almost never (9.92%) 2 – Rarely (18.32%) 3 – Sometimes (30.53%) 4 – Often (32.06%) 5 – Almost always (9.16%)
Four in ten of those who responded said that the threads "often" or "always" stay on AN/I for the appropriate length of time; three in ten instead said this only happened "sometimes".
[ edit ]
How often, in general, would you say the following statements apply to discussion on AN/I? — Discussion is focused and neutral.
2.94% did not select an option [?]
1 – Almost never (18.94%) 2 – Rarely (29.55%) 3 – Sometimes (33.33%) 4 – Often (15.91%) 5 – Almost always (2.27%)
Almost half of respondents said that discussions on AN/I are "almost never" or "rarely" focused and neutral.
[ edit ]
On a scale of 1-5, do you agree with the general process of how AN/I reports work? (e.g report, discussion, and then decision?)
2.21% did not select an option [?]
1 – Strongly disagree (9.02%) 2 – (20.30%) 3 – (19.55%) 4 – (38.35%) 5 – Strongly agree (12.78%)
More than half of users "agree" or "strongly agree" with the general process of how AN/I reports work.
[ edit ]
In your opinion, what changes should be made to how reports are made on AN/I?
Participants could select more than one answer
5.88% did not select an option [?]
1 – Use of structured reports (e.g. form-based submission) (59.06%) 2 – Private reporting (11.02%) 3 – Multiple options for reporting (e.g. public reporting and private reporting) (35.43%) 4 – It's fine the way it is (25.98%) 5 – Other (see next question) (31.50%)
More than a quarter of respondents thought that AN/I was fine the way it was, but almost 60% wanted some form of more structured reporting.
[ edit ]
What are some other changes you would like to see in the AN/I reporting process?
62 participants (45.59%) did not enter a response for this question
1 – Clerking and moderators (14.86%) 2 – Closer adherence to policy (6.76%) 3 – Boomerang (5.41%) 4 – General rules (2.7%) 5 – Sanctions against abusers (5.41%) 6 – Fairness / Merit-based process (6.76%) 7 – Punish bogus reports (4.05%) 8 – Referring people to different processes (2.7%) 9 – Training (4.05%) 10 – Misc. policy suggestions (4.05%) 11 – Environment (6.76%) 12 – More civility in general (6.76%)
13 – Grouping related (4.05%) 14 – Other technical solution (2.7%) 15 – Misc filters / limits (4.05%) 16 – Structured forms (4.05%) 17 – Time limit / subpages (8.11%) 18 – More structure in general (10.81%) 19 – Generate data / metrics (2.7%) 20 – General reporting (10.81%) 21 – Separate or ban uninvolved editors / non-admins (14.86%) 22 – Negative feedback (2.7%) 23 – Unsorted (4.05%)
[ edit ]
What do you like about the AN/I process?
70 participants (51.47%) did not enter a response for this question
1 – Versatility (3.03%) 2 – Ease of use (4.55%) 3 – Visibility (10.61%) 4 – Handles some issues well (10.61%) 5 – Efficiency/quickness (12.12%) 6 – Thoroughness of process (13.64%) 7 – Openness/transparency (18.18%) 8 – Community-led nature (7.58%) 9 – Fairness/consensus (4.55%) 10 – Best of a bad bunch (3.03%) 11 – Nothing/I don't like it (22.73%) 12 – Other (4.55%)
[ edit ]
On a scale of 1 to 5, how well are specific types of problems are dealt with at AN/I? — Sock puppetry
5.15% did not select an option [?]
1 – Very poorly (5.43%) 2 – Reasonably poorly (8.53%) 3 – Neither poorly nor well (27.13%) 4 – Reasonably well (43.41%) 5 – Very well (15.50%)
The majority of respondents (58.91%) said they believe sock puppetry cases are handled well on AN/I.
[ edit ]
On a scale of 1 to 5, how well are specific types of problems are dealt with at AN/I? — Personal attacks
5.15% did not select an option [?]
1 – Very poorly (24.03%) 2 – Reasonably poorly (24.81%) 3 – Neither poorly nor well (14.73%) 4 – Reasonably well (27.91%) 5 – Very well (8.53%)
Almost half of respondents believe that AN/I reports of personal attacks are handled poorly. Less than 10% of respondents felt they are handled very well.
[ edit ]
On a scale of 1 to 5, how well are specific types of problems are dealt with at AN/I? — "Bot" or automated script problems
10.29% did not select an option [?]
1 – Very poorly (2.46%) 2 – Reasonably poorly (9.02%) 3 – Neither poorly nor well (27.05%) 4 – Reasonably well (41.80%) 5 – Very well (19.67%)
Three-fifths of respondents believed that problems involving bots or automated scripts were handled "reasonably well" or "very well" at AN/I.
[ edit ]
On a scale of 1 to 5, how well are specific types of problems are dealt with at AN/I? — Impersonation accounts
10.29% did not select an option [?]
1 – Very poorly (6.56%) 2 – Reasonably poorly (5.74%) 3 – Neither poorly nor well (21.31%) 4 – Reasonably well (42.62%) 5 – Very well (23.77%)
Two-thirds of respondents said they believe that impersonation accounts are dealt with well at AN/I.
[ edit ]
On a scale of 1 to 5, how well are specific types of problems are dealt with at AN/I? — Long-term user disputes
2.94% did not select an option [?]
1 – Very poorly (30.30%) 2 – Reasonably poorly (23.48%) 3 – Neither poorly nor well (25.76%) 4 – Reasonably well (16.67%) 5 – Very well (3.79%)
More than half of respondents said they believe that long-term user disputes are handled "reasonably poorly" or "very poorly" at AN/I.
[ edit ]
On a scale of 1 to 5, how well are specific types of problems are dealt with at AN/I? — Short-term user disputes
5.15% did not select an option [?]
1 – Very poorly (11.45%) 2 – Reasonably poorly (19.08%) 3 – Neither poorly nor well (19.08%) 4 – Reasonably well (41.98%) 5 – Very well (8.40%)
More than half of respondents said they believe that short-term user disputes are handled "reasonably well" or "very well" at AN/I.
[ edit ]
On a scale of 1 to 5, how well are specific types of problems are dealt with at AN/I? — Topic-related problems
5.15% did not select an option [?]
1 – Very poorly (16.28%) 2 – Reasonably poorly (18.60%) 3 – Neither poorly nor well (36.43%) 4 – Reasonably well (24.03%) 5 – Very well (4.65%)
Fewer than 30% of respondents said they believe that topic-related problems were handled "reasonably well" or "very well" at AN/I.
[ edit ]
On a scale of 1 to 5, how well are specific types of problems are dealt with at AN/I? — Copyright violations
7.35% did not select an option [?]
1 – Very poorly (2.38%) 2 – Reasonably poorly (6.35%) 3 – Neither poorly nor well (17.46%) 4 – Reasonably well (42.06%) 5 – Very well (31.75%)
Almost three-quarters of respondents said they thought that copyright violations were handled "reasonably well" or "very well" on AN/I.
[ edit ]
For which types of problems does AN/I work well?
38 participants (27.94%) did not enter a response for this question
1 – Urgent (7.14%) 2 – Straightforward (44.9%) 3 – Short term problems (3.06%) 4 – Many eyes on problem (2.04%) 5 – Limited discussion (8.16%) 6 – Single problem editors (5.10%) 7 – No need for kindness (1.02%) 8 – Tech problems (6.12%) 9 – Bot problems (2.04%) 10 – Sockpuppetry (16.33%) 11 – Copyright violations (7.14%)
12 – Legal threats (4.08%) 13 – SPA, POV (5.10%) 14 – Rules other (2.04%) 15 – Misuse of admin tools (2.04%) 16 – Personal attacks (8.16%) 17 – User issues (7.14%) 18 – New editors problems (6.12%) 19 – Serious vandalism (19.39%) 20 – "Nothing" (4.08%) 21 – "Everything" (3.06%) 22 – Other (5.10%)
[ edit ]
For which types of problems does AN/I NOT work well?
37 participants (27.21%) did not enter a response for this question
1 – Conflicts with long history (21.21%) 2 – Complex conflicts (24.24%) 3 – Content conflicts (17.17%) 4 – Certain topics (4.04%) 5 – Unclear issues (11.11%) 6 – Conflicts better suited elsewhere (7.07%) 7 – Conflicts that attract attention (3.03%) 8 – Bot problems (2.02%) 9 – Admin conduct (4.04%)
10 – Bad faith reports/"gaming the system" (5.05%) 11 – Conflicts between factions (cabals) (13.13%) 12 – Conflicts with a certain type of editor (25.25%) 13 – Interpersonal disputes (21.21%) 14 – Threats (1.01%) 15 – Civility violations (18.18%) 16 – Reports from minorities, minority editors involved (3.03%) 17 – (Almost) all problems (7.07%)
[ edit ]
How confident are you in taking part in discussions on reported incidents?
2.21% did not select an option [?]
1 – Generally confident (33.83%) 2 – Somewhat confident (38.35%) 3 – Not confident (14.29%) 4 – I never feel confident taking part in AN/I discussions (13.53%)
Almost three-quarters of respondents stated they are "somewhat confident" or "generally confident" when responding to discussions on reported incidents.
[ edit ]
Have you avoided reporting one or more incidents to AN/I in the last 12 months, because you did not think it would be handled appropriately there?
2.21% did not select an option [?]
1 – No (40.30%) 2 – Yes, one or two times (26.87%) 3 – Yes, between three and ten times (17.16%) 4 – Yes, more than ten times (8.96%) 5 – Other (free text) (6.72%)
More than half of respondents said they have specifically avoided making a report on AN/I because they were afraid it would not be handled appropriately.
[ edit ]
Have you avoided reporting an incident or taking part in a discussion on AN/I in the last 12 months, because you were afraid of retributions of any kind?
1.47% did not select an option [?]
1 – No (56.72%) 2 – Yes, one or two times (21.64%) 3 – Yes, between three and ten times (14.93%) 4 – Yes, more than ten times (2.99%) 5 – Other (free text) (3.73%)
Almost two-fifths of participants reported they had avoided reporting an incident or taking part in a discussion on AN/I in the last 12 months, because they were afraid of retributions of any kind.
[ edit ]
Have you avoided reporting one or more incidents to AN/I in the last 12 months, because you did not think it would be handled appropriately there?
> If you did not select "no" above, why did you think those incidents would not be handled appropriately?
74 participants (54.41%) did not enter a response for this question
1 – Avoiding drama (8.06%) 2 – Complex issues (12.90%) 3 – Toxicity (12.90%) 4 – Civility issues / threats (6.45%) 5 – Biased participants (9.68%) 6 – Defensive cliques (19.35%) 7 – Admin confidence (3.23%) 8 – Certain users protected (4.84%)
9 – Boomerang effect (12.90%) 10 – Easier to ignore the problem (8.06%) 11 – Ineffective / inconsistent (8.06%) 12 – No chance of action (8.06%) 13 – Bad past experience (6.45%) 14 – Too difficult / too much scrutiny (3.23%) 15 – Better options (6.45%) 16 – Other / meta (3.23%)
[ edit ]
On a scale of 1-5, how likely are you to recommend that an editor who is involved in a dispute make a report at AN/I?
0.74% did not select an option [?]
1 – Very unlikely (20.00%) 2 – (20.74%) 3 – (30.37%) 4 – (17.78%) 5 – Very likely (11.11%)
Two-fifths of participants said that they were "unlikely" or "very unlikely" to recommend that an editor who is involved in a dispute make a report at AN/I.
[ edit ]
If you could change one thing about AN/I, what would it be?
26 participants (19.12%) did not enter a response for this question
1 – Clerking and moderators (21.82%) 2 – Closing cases (4.55%) 3 – Boomerang (2.73%) 4 – Misc rules (0.91%) 5 – Fairness / Merit-based process (10%) 6 – Punish bogus reports (3.64%) 7 – Referring people to different processes (5.45%) 8 – Misc. policy suggestions (2.73%) 9 – Punish incivility (8.18%) 10 – Environment (5.45%) 11 – More civility in general (1.82%) 12 – Other technical solution (3.64%)
13 – Structured forms (5.45%) 14 – Subpages and length (4.55%) 15 – More structure in general (9.09%) 16 – Private reporting (1.82%) 17 – Generate data / metrics (0.91%) 18 – Misc reporting (2.73%) 19 – Separate or ban uninvolved editors / non-admins (10.91%) 20 – Punish derailers (5.45%) 21 – No change (2.73%) 22 – Get rid of it (3.64%) 23 – Not sure (2.73%) 24 – Unsorted (0.91%)
^ a b c d e f Some responses were sorted into more than one "bucket", which means that the number of actual responses may be less than the total number of bucketed responses.
