Bodnotbod
Hi there. To find out about me look at my user page at the English Wikipedia.
I am most interested in:
My favourites:
Here's a copy of the text I submitted in my application:
Why are you interested?
I think Wikimedia is the most interesting internet organisation out there, with perhaps Google running a close second, but even Google's aims are not as inspiring as Wikimedia's.
I joined Wikipedia in 2004 and I have been overjoyed to see how it has developed over those 5 years. I just wish I'd been there from the start.
I also keep an eye on Wikiquote, Wikibooks, Wiktionary, Wikiversity and Commons and I am inspired by their potential.
I feel my intended focus on rewarding editors will retain editors on any project and also bring in new blood. These are important considerations for anyone working on strategy as we have a current issue with a falling off in contributions.
I love being part of the tremendous Wikimedia community. I am committed to the Wikimedia Foundation's stated cause of bringing knowledge to the world. What's more, I have the time to back up that commitment with contributions since - due to health reasons - I am largely housebound, so spending 3 hours a day on Wikipedia or other WMF project has become for me a great way to give something back to society in return for the welfare payments I receive from the UK government.
I find the WMF an awe-inspiring organisation and I wish to see it go from strength to strength. I feel I can usefully be a part of that. I would be proud to help.
Useful skills
The most compelling reasons for taking me on are my enthusiasm and the time I have to give to this process. I am also extremely good at communicating with people online without causing drama and have a way of taking the heat out of arguments.
I have shown my commitment, enthusiasm and given my time to strategy these last few weeks already and this has been noted by Philippe and Eekim. I have read over 80% of all proposals submitted to the strategy wiki [that was at the time of applying, there are now even more proposals, so I have some catching up to do], which I suspect is greatly more than the average applicant due to the low levels of feedback I saw as I provided my own ratings.
I also drafted a proposal of my own, which has the title "Reward editors" and can be seen on the strategy wiki.
http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposal:Reward_editors
I also have lots of favorite proposals of those I have read so far, which can be seen on my favorites page:
http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Favorites/Bodnotbod
The theme that I would like to put across as a member of a task force is that of providing more tangible rewards to editors so that they remain motivated to contribute to projects for longer. This can be seen from my proposal and the top listed proposals on my favorites page. This would relate to ESP 4 here:
http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Emerging_strategic_priorities
However, I realise I will be working as part of a team. So, if I am unable to persuade anyone else on the team of the value of my way of thinking I would accept that and then continue to work with team consensus on the ideas that are most important to the group as a whole.
Health problems mean that I am unable to work in traditional employment, however my problems are seldom so bad that I cannot use my computer at home. For this reason I will be able to devote 10 hours per week at least to the process, and would aim to spend 12 hours (3 hours per day, 4 days per week). That's about the amount of time I have spent on strategy wiki since the proposals started being submitted.
I have 10 years office experience, generally working in small teams. I have always been the staff member who really explored how new technology might aid the productivity of a team. For example, when one office moved from dumb terminals to PCs I was the person who advised us to keep our log books as a spreadsheet rather than on paper to be able to fill them in much more quickly. In another case I massively updated an Excel macro so that it automated many of the repetitive and dull formatting functions that were previously done by hand.
I have 27 years of computer use under my belt and that's given me at least a better than average grounding in how to use software, usability issues, frustrations etc. I have also been a heavy internet user for 10 years, so I have long experience of using websites and I see which ones really nail it and which sites are a pain to use for whatever reason.
I have been a Wikipedian since 2004 and have over 7,000 edits to my name. I love all the projects but Wikipedia is the one I contribute to. In the last year I have tended to use Huggle and spend time combating vandalism and welcoming new users. Prior to that my edits were largely adding to things I found interesting.
I am knowledgeable about Wikipedia policies.
I am a long time and prolific user of various forums and I very, very rarely get into arguments because I do not encourage heat over light and I am willing to apologise (even if I feel I am right) if a discussion starts to get out of hand. For this reason I feel I would make a good facilitator for discussing strategy, trying my best to keep conversations focused on the outcomes not on personalities.