Read more: More detailed and updated metrics are available in the Phase 2 Metrics Report.

Teahouse:metrics

» findings on editor participation, engagement and retention from the pilot period

WP:Teahouse was designed to introduce new editors to the Wikipedia community in a friendly and engaging way. Between February 27th and May 27th, almost 600 editors participated in Teahouse, 68% of them new editors. Guests asked more than 500 questions on the Teahouse Q&A board, and created over 200 guest profiles. More than 40 editors contributed as Teahouse hosts.

In this report we assess the impact of the Teahouse during this pilot period. We report data on the participation, engagement and retention of new editors gathered from surveys and edit logs. We also report feedback from Teahouse hosts and other Wikipedian participants in order to understand the impact of Teahouse on the wider editing community.

Executive summary

New & experienced editors alike rated all aspects of their Teahouse experience favorably by a wide margin
Most questions asked on the Q&A board came from new editors
Many new editors returned to ask or answer additional questions
28% of Teahouse guests were women, higher than the Wikipedia average of 9%
Teahouse guests contributed more article content than other new editors, and that content survived longer
More Teahouse guests were still editing at the end of the pilot period
Only 4.5% of invitees visited Teahouse, but some recruitment strategies yielded higher success rates
Survey responses reflect perennial challenges for new editors, as well as new directions

Archives

/Archive

WP:Teahouse

Teahouse was launched on February 27th 2012, and the pilot period ran for approximately three months, through May 27th. In that time 442 registered editors participated (made at least one edit) on the Teahouse Q&A board and 514 questions were asked. Approximately 215 new profiles were created on the Guestbook page. 586 editors (68% of them new editors ) participated in all.

Methods

Surveys

To assess editors’ perceptions of Teahouse and their experiences we surveyed Teahouse guests twice during the pilot period, once during week 5 and once during week 11. We also surveyed Teahouse hosts during week 11, asking them a related set of questions. Our response rates for these surveys were relatively high: 25% (68/267) of new editors and 56% (71/127) of experienced Wikipedians who were offered the survey responded.

Below we present the results from the surveys conducted in week 11, near the end of the pilot period. We are still working on integrating the results from the week 5 survey of Teahouse guests into these totals. In the meantime, preliminary results from that survey can be viewed here.

Edit logs

In order to assess activity on Teahouse we tracked edits to Teahouse pages by new editors and veterans on a live ‘mirror’ of en.wikipedia.org. We tracked transclusions of Teahouse invitation templates and (aggregated) editing activities of Teahouse guests with MySQL queries and Python scripts.

High level findings

Participation and engagement : new editors

68% of Teahouse participants (those who edited either the Q&A board or the Guests page) were new editors.

» New editors give the Teahouse high marks

71% of new editors surveyed said that they were "Satisfied" or "Very satisfied" with their Teahouse experience, versus only 5% who said they were "Dissatisfied" or "Very dissatisfied" .

When asked to describe what in particular they liked about their experience, new editors cited a range of factors, from the promptness and quality of the answers they received to the friendly atmosphere and the ease of use.

Was there anything in particular you liked about your Teahouse experience? Tell us about it.
It has the word tea in the name, I like tea
Encouraging and not invalidative.
As a total newbie to editing in Wikipedia I felt better knowing that I had to start SOMEWHERE.
Pretty much everything. It's a really good idea. I hope when I get more experience I'll be able to help out over there too!
The key to the whole experience is allowing guests to answer questions. Change that and I'm no longer interested.
The fact that my questions are usually answered satisfactorily.
People wanting to help.
low-key, friendly smart people; i'm learning from the Teahouse.
everything
Help from people who do not criticise
The new article was not getting approved, being unaccepted by different editors for different reasons. My question and the discussion about it got the article cleared for approval.
friendly and focused
Quality answers.
The experince in general and the people defintely the people
Courteous, detailed and prompt responses.
I liked how you could look at other questions that you might have not known the answers to.
It was warm and friendly.
Cool message when I first became a Wikipedia editor on my talk page and a really nice lady. Easy to post an answer and the community responded quickly.
It's good to see there are so many people willing to help each other and the wikipedia project
The speed that help was given and the friendliness of my editor.
answers
Editors a bit more human and polite than experience outside of teahouse
It's a valid attempt at building community- and newbies like myself are glad to get the chance to have such a forum
no
Not really, I do like the atmosphere though!
Making something like Wikipedia so simple.
No.
Its a great place to ask questions rather then looking on the internet to figure out Wikipedia's functions. Its great

Only one respondent answered the related question on dislikes, saying that there was a lot of talk and not much action at Teahouse.

Was there anything in particular you disliked about your Teahouse experience? Tell us about it.
I just did. why is this survey going in circles. Answer = talk talk talk and only ONE person did anything and only ONE person did anything
No problems at all.

Survey responents also provided valuable feedback, most of it positive, in their answers to a follow-up question Is there anything else you'd like to share with us? If so, you can let us know here.

Is there anything else you'd like to share with us? If so, you can let us know here.
I hope to receive information when another Edit-a-Thon comes up. The one I attended was for Women't History month.
Yes. I'd like you to tell all the hosts at the teahouse that their work is appreciated and to keep up the good work, yourself included!
I'm also impressed that you're recording metrics as you go. Overall, the execution of this idea has been brilliant. As I told Sarah, the teahouse is what changed me from being a gawker into a (very newbie) editor.
Thanks for all of it.
less talk, fewer surveys, more action. Sorry Mr Morgan. kelly222
Please! The teahouse should look better!
Thanks
it is quite difficult to be able to do certain thing on wikipedia such as add a picture to a page. I have tried, i have asked the question but am still unable to do it
I am a newbie, and I really appreciated the help on Teahouse. It was unexpected and very helpful.
I appreciate this questionnaire and welcome your efforts to improve Wikipedia.
I am really happy to be a part of Wikipedia. I hope this will last for a long time.
You're cool. Keep on a'rockin.
Keep up the good work, thanks for creating teahouse!
Can teahouse be for old users that haven't been in Wikipedia for months and looking to edit after a lot of months?
congratulations
I appreciate the survey! Thanks for including me....
Not much right now. There are plenty of ways to improve Wikipedia, and I think awareness about the Teahouse will help.

» Female newcomers participate in Teahouse at a higher rate

In all, 28% of survey respondents self-identified as female. This is a noticeably higher rate than figures cited in previous studies, which range between 8% and 13%, suggesting that Teahouse appealed to female editors.

Female newcomers did not rate their overall experience with Teahouse substantially higher or lower than respondents who identified as male. However, female editors' satisfaction ratings for the answers the received on the Q&A board (while still positive) were noticably lower on average than the satisfaction ratings given by their male counterparts. While it should be noted that these averages are based on a small sample size and are therefore sensitive to outliers (one or two editors who recorded particularly good or particularly bad experiences), we intend to investigate why gender seemed to be a factor in editors' satisfaction with Teahouse Q&A.

Participation and engagement : Wikipedians

Experienced Wikipedians (defined as editors whose accounts were created before 1/1/2012 or who had made more than 100 edits at the time they first participated) who had edited Teahouse/Questions or Teahouse/Guests during the pilot period and who were not blocked were also invited to participate in a survey. 73% of these survey respondents indicated that they were not current or former Teahouse hosts.

» Experienced Wikipedians give the Teahouse high marks

70% of Wikipedians surveyed said that they were "Satisfied" or "Very satisfied" with their Teahouse experience, versus 5% for "Very dissatisfied" or "Dissatisfied", which mirrors the responses of new editors.

Statistic	Value
Min Value	2
Max Value	5
Mean	4.02
Variance	0.82
Standard Deviation	0.91
Total Responses	58

» Many experienced Wikipedians believe the Teahouse has a positive impact on the experience of new editors

When asked to describe what in particular they they liked about their experience on the Teahouse, experienced editors cited many of the same features as new editors: the promptness and quality of the answers they read or received, the friendly atmosphere, etc. Many responents also indicated that they believed that the Teahouse was having a positive impact on newcomers, primarily by functioning as a friendly "safe zone" for new editors, and that the presence of the Teahouse was beneficial to the community as a whole. As one editor eloquently put it: "There is nothing extraordinary about it. It just needs to exist and is fundamental to the Wikipedia experience."

Was there anything in particular you liked about your Teahouse experience? Tell us about it.
I really like the fact that Teahouse hosts were searched out, and the board was not just created with the attitude of "If we build it, someone will help".
I like the fact that questions get answered quickly, there's a message on my talk page when someone has answered, and it's easy to have a conversation, if I don't understand the answer completely. I like that it's for beginniners, because sometimes I have to ask dumb questions, and I know these people have volunteered to be there, so they're less likely to get frustrated with me than regular computer people.
Many experienced editors coming together and helping out new editors. I've got a quite a lot of Edit Conflict notices too!
I see so many "you did this wrong" messages on new users' talk pages, and I have to believe that whether or not an individual who received a Teahouse invitation actually got to the Teahouse, that person received at least one "warm, fuzzy" note from someone who cares about their continued contributions.
General constructive feel to the place and the positive impression of people trying to help you with your questions
There is nothing extraordinary about it. It just needs to exist and is fundamental to the Wikipedia experience.
I liked that the Teahouse is a ground for new users so they have lots of support, and that hosts and new users interact a lot with each other.
Helping
Everyone has been very friendly.
I believe editors are much more friendly with newcomers, its the opposite of don't bite the newcomers, its more like give the newcomers a sucker and a high five.
The friendly atmosphere - we could do with more of that on wiki
Friendly collaborative atmosphere.
There are some really left field questions asked which require some investigation to come up with a suitable answer and I enjoy doing that. Seeing editors who have got into problems turn themselves around and become productive is good too.
I like the design and friendliness
Safe zone
As I mentioned earlier, I like the responsiveness, and to a lesser extent, the info I got is fairly helpful
Good answers, mainly
I like the emphasis on simplicity so new users don't get frustrated
The interface for asking a question is very slick
The interface is pretty.
Friendly tone
I probably like the reaction of the newbies best. Setup and improvement of the interface is great and all, but it's really nice to see that it is having an impact.
Accessible and friendly folks
A very specific answer to a specific question. Sometimes the regular help and policy pages are so broad that even after hours of reading, I still didn't find an answer to a specific question.
It realy helped...
I love the atomosphere and how the Teahouse works.
I think it is better than FeedbackDashboard to help newbies. We also started a same project on or.wikipedia as WP:CS. So my thanks to the team :-)
Learning from others, in addition to sharing my own knowledge. Non-confrontational.

No respondents stated any specific dislikes in response to the question Was there anything in particular you liked about your Teahouse experience?.

Experienced editors also provided valuable feedback, most of it positive but with some concerns and criticisms, in their answers to four follow-up questions:

What was the most rewarding thing about participating in Teahouse?
What was the most frustrating thing about participating in Teahouse?
What was the most surprising thing about participating in Teahouse?
Is there anything else you'd like to share with us?

Responses to these questions are included in the four tables below.

*What was the most rewarding* thing about participating in Teahouse?**
Helping people. That should be enough for its own sake.
Getting real help FAST.
Helping out new members to make them contributing members of the project.
My son told me, before I started hosting, that if I could positively effect just one new editor in such a way that s/he becomes as prolific or motivated as some of us, that I should be totally jazzed, as, after all, it takes a team to build an encyclopedia.
Positive, helpful attitude, informal nature
its a help desk
Its existence, whether people use it or not, makes people more comfortable participating in Wikipedia communities.
Helping new users
Helping others
again, very friendly response
Helping some editors create pages through articles for creation.
Quick answers to my queries
Nothing really. I only participated once at the very beginning because I saw that a host had given an incorrect answer about formatting a reference
If I can actually convince someone that Wikipedia is a helpful community and not cloistered and tribalistic, that's great.
Interesting, useful questions being answered
Helping promising newcomers
Seeing new editors realise that we aren't all out there to get them
helping Wikipedia model a less combative relational style
Getting to hep new editors.
Helping a new user
Getting feedback so quickly
Knowing you are helping new editors.
Friendly tone
The newbie responses, of course. (With a few obvious exceptions.)
Being able to help new users who I then saw use the advice and do very well in their area of interest.
Discovering that I wasn't the most clueless contributor to Wikipedia.
Being able to assist new editors in a more helpful way.
sulotions
Being able to help other users
Giving help.
Helping others.

*What was the most frustrating* thing about participating in Teahouse?**
1	The inevitable comparison to Esperanza.
2	Some people's answers were still not specific/basic enough for me.
3	Many edit conflicts when answering a question.
4	The criticism ad nauseum for inviting an editor who turns out to be a jerk. There weren't many kudos for all the invitations that went out to non-jerks.
5	One of my questions got a quick, constructive answer but it did not in the end solve my problem
6	finding it
7	People do not know how to enunciate their problems into questions and therefore do not use the Teahouse.
8	Lots of new users start abusing Wikipedia despite our help.
9	The reversion of good-faith edits
10	It was a wee bit hard to find - I keep getting lost in Wikipedia.
11	I find Teahouse to be the most difficult place on Wikipedia to explain to someone that the topic of their article may not be notable.
12	Difficulty in searching for already answered questions
13	I don't know if I can help anyone--I'm not sure if I have perspective
14	The burocracy - having to place talkback notices, not answering questions because x editors have already answered etc.
15	endlesss variations on "why isn't x notable?" "why do I need to verify information"
16	Templates... everywhere templates... so many templates...
17	When I got the response, I posted a question regarding my mistake, and according to the responder's user talk info box, he would respond to my question on my user talk page cuz he would be watching my user talk page. He did not respond to my question. I suspect he failed in doing the followup. Dunno, but I in the end was forced to ask someone else.
18	I just stated it in the "what we should work on next" section. Basically, if you load the question page, then try to click the Edit link to clarify a question or to ask for more detail, but someone else has posted a question in the meantime, the Edit link will take a person to the wrong question. If a person uses a browser that saves state, like the Chrome browser, then hitting back and trying again will always take a person to the wrong question unless the page is reloaded.
19	I am concerned that it's redundant with the Help Desk.
20	The fact that you have to be a registered host to answer questions.
21	Jumbled, disconnected threads
22	The exceptions to the newbie responses.
23	Explaining to folks exactly what it was
24	Frustrating? In Teahouse? I wasn't.
25	I have really no idea what it's all about
26	Edit conflicts and locating the articles new users are referring to.

*What was the most surprising* thing about participating in Teahouse?**
How quickly many varied members of the community have realized the possibilities of the Teahouse.
How friendly everyone was.
How many people are willing to give out a helping hand to unexperienced editors.
Question/Answer response time. So fast!
its a duplication of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk
The interface is radically different from the rest of Wikipedia and I am not sure that is a good thing.
That it exists - lovely! Somebody actually sent me a cup of tea!
Friendliness of the hosts
Nothing really, apart from discovering that you had to be host to answer, which incidentally, I don't think is a bad idea at all, itshould just have been made clearer to the rest of the community before we blundered in
It's not more different from Wikipedia's typical pages--it should really have a visually striking difference (maybe even not using Vector or Monobook, if that's possible) that is super-clean and easy to understand.
It wasn't abused as much as I expected.
The number of people wanting to help out as hosts.
questions on the most unexpected topics
Only visited it once so no comment
it was very easy to use and beautifully designed
Friendly and relatively quick responses
It actually seems to be working! How scary is that?
I spent a good 15 minutes one day clicking edit, typing out an answer to a question, realizing that the question wasn't the one I was trying to answer, hitting back, clicking edit, noticing that it was again the right answer, then trying to figure out what was wrong and what I needed to do to answer the darn question.
The interface being so simple compared to normal talk page editing
The amount of people that are participating, and that express support of the idea of the Teahouse. Sure, there are "opponents", but even still, it's quite remarkable to see how many people actually have an interest in providing a friendlier experience for new editors.
That it existed
That I could actually contribute, that I could share how I solved a problem that someone else just ran into and didn't know where to turn.
The speed of response at the Q&A board.
very responssive
How easy it is to use
It's total lack of doing anything ?? !!
That there are enough hosts around to answer the questions so promptly!

Is there anything else you'd like to share with us?
1	I started by just adding info to TV epeisode pages when I was sick and watching a lot of TV. I NEVER would have gone on to edit and create articles, make tables, add citations, etc., if not for the friendly people at Teahouse. I'd gone to the Help page, and it looked intimidating, and people were asking questions I didn't understand, so it felt over my head. Teahouse was exactly what I needed to give me the confidence to jump in and edit. I'm now actively involved in about 40 pages, and have created several from scratch. None of that would have happened without Teahouse. I just wish every newbie knew about you. Thanks! - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 22:46, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
2	I hope the Teahouse will expand and be the go-to place for new editors just joining Wikipedia.
3	Thank you for inviting me to participate as a host from the get-go. I'm proud to be affiliated with the Teahouse.
4	While I like the name Teahouse (and Village Pump) I don't think these names are easily recognizable for (new) users. I do not think of a teahouse as a place for Q&A and I can remember that in my early Wiki days I was often quite frustrated by not easily being able to find the right place to seek help or ask questions. The fact that I only recently discovered the Teahouse as a Q&A place (after 5 years) speaks to that.
5	Be nicer to others
6	When I go tea house, I'd like to see a menu so I can select what tea I want and then see a representative cup at a little table. :-)
7	The TH looks like a generally useful addition to WP, although my impression is that most of the guests have a COI and just want advice about how to get "their" article onto WP. Not sure about how useful to increasing rentention of "real" editors that will be in the long run.
8	I think it's a very noble goal to get users in general to feel welcome and women in particular.
9	A teahouse bot would be a great idea...
10	When I first saw it, I thought "there are plenty of existing ways of helping new users. We do not need another". I still think the same.
11	No, but good luck with everything!
12	Clarify what Teahouse is all about in simple terms and explain the benefits of joining. Best regards. Chris
13	Okay, thank you!
14	Thanks for the continued work on this. I think it's turning out to be a valuable resource :-)

Do you have any suggestions for new features that would be helpful for Teahouse hosts?
1	Hosts need an easier way to invite people.
2	Maybe sort out questions into various subheadings (like vandalism, references, BLP, etc.) to make it easier for hosts to narrow down their speciality.
3	whats rong ith the help desk, seams this is an unnecessary duplication
4	The basic Wikipedia tutorials are insufficient and need to be redeveloped for many different audiences and purposes. This would help hosts a lot.
5	An automated talkback notice would be great, if it's a requirement to include one.
6	a really good template for answering "why was my article turned down at AFC?"
7	Easier to use/find templates? Figuring out what to even do with the things at first is a bit of a tumble, though maybe that was just my laziness shining through, I dunno.
8	No idea. Mostly busy with my little geograpical and photographical activities.
9	If I did, I'd be working on them. :)
10	A threaded arcjhive index, separating the archives into subject areas such as uploading photographs with sub-threads for 'fair use' and 'Commons' and such.
11	Making WT:Teahouse and the Host lounge a unified page
12	Be very clear about what you are trying to accomplish with Teahouse. For me it was not at all clear (or I was too busy to read the notes, in which case make them more appealing somehow).
13	General timetable for when individual hosts expect to be online to answer questions, not quite a rota but something resembling one; completely optional and merely a guideline, rather than a list of strict commitments. Maybe just a single "typical week" affair which could be updated by hosts as required, with a short section to include notes informing others of impending public holidays, etc.

» Most experienced Wikipedians intend to participate again

In response to the question Do you think you will participate in the Teahouse in the future? 79% of Wikipedians surveyed responded "Yes, frequently" or "Maybe once in a while".

Statistic	Value
Min Value	1
Max Value	4
Mean	2
Variance	1.09
Standard Deviation	1.04
Total Responses	56

» Wikipedians see plenty of room for improvement

Experienced Wikipedians also provided helpful suggestions on new features to further support Teahouse guests, listed in the table below.

Other (please suggest new features below, or use this space to elaborate on ideas you've checked in this list)
2	I wish there was a way to meet people who are interested in the same kind of articles I am.
3	links to mentor/mentee page
4	live phone number, widget which says how many hosts are logged in, anything which makes it look real and live
5	not sure
6	Ways of connecting guests to small sub-communities of shared interests
7	Better search of already answered questions, a more user friendly interface
8	I don't support live chat as it gets away from the WP norm of patience really is needed at times to get responses. Also has the risk of just becoming social media and "WP isn't FB" :-)
9	space to feature cool work done by new editors and Teahouse guests
10	One idea I have is: Instead of reams of textual stuff with links to this and that, it would be nice to have a large picture with various parts that one can hover (to seedescriptions) and click. The idea is that humans respond more quickly to pictures than to text, and the picture can have things organized. Imagine a picture of the inside of a library, with "Reference", "Info Desk", etc. Well, just an idea. My main goal is to cut down on the visual clutter and to make finding info regarding editing easier (e.g. learning about Manual of Style...that one is a LONG page!)
11	If someone loads the question page, then clicks the Edit link to a question after someone else has posted a new question, the Edit link will not be to the correct question. If a person is using the Chrome browser or another save-state browser, then hitting back and trying again will always take a person to the wrong question. This is because the Teahouse puts new questions at the top instead of the bottom of the page, unlike every other Wikipedia talk page.
12	Assistance with getting started - help with finding articles to work on, knowing how to improve pages. Personal help from hosts in this respect would be good.
13	Simplify welcomes. Simplify and reorganize the first tutorial along the lines of en:User:Pluma/adoption. Do NOT link to existing tutorials and how-to pages unless they're simplified for new users.
14	I've never seen a brief description of what the teahouse is really all about. Then a brief usage note would be useful
15	FAQ (sorry if one already exists) - we have plenty of actual questions now, so which ones are in fact frequently asked?

Experienced Wikipedians also provided helpful suggestions on new features to improve the experience of participating as a Teahouse host, listed in the table below.

Do you have any suggestions for new features that would be helpful for Teahouse hosts?
1	Hosts need an easier way to invite people.
2	Maybe sort out questions into various subheadings (like vandalism, references, BLP, etc.) to make it easier for hosts to narrow down their speciality.
3	whats rong ith the help desk, seams this is an unnecessary duplication
4	The basic Wikipedia tutorials are insufficient and need to be redeveloped for many different audiences and purposes. This would help hosts a lot.
5	An automated talkback notice would be great, if it's a requirement to include one.
6	a really good template for answering "why was my article turned down at AFC?"
7	Easier to use/find templates? Figuring out what to even do with the things at first is a bit of a tumble, though maybe that was just my laziness shining through, I dunno.
8	No idea. Mostly busy with my little geograpical and photographical activities.
9	If I did, I'd be working on them. :)
10	A threaded arcjhive index, separating the archives into subject areas such as uploading photographs with sub-threads for 'fair use' and 'Commons' and such.
11	Making WT:Teahouse and the Host lounge a unified page
12	Be very clear about what you are trying to accomplish with Teahouse. For me it was not at all clear (or I was too busy to read the notes, in which case make them more appealing somehow).
13	General timetable for when individual hosts expect to be online to answer questions, not quite a rota but something resembling one; completely optional and merely a guideline, rather than a list of strict commitments. Maybe just a single "typical week" affair which could be updated by hosts as required, with a short section to include notes informing others of impending public holidays, etc.

Q&A board

The Q&A board experienced a relatively high volume of activity, which was sustained throughout the pilot period. There were an average of 39 revisions and 5.6 questions per day (for comparison, the Wikipedia Help Desk averaged 90.3 revisions and 16.9 questions per day over the same period).

Findings

Participation and engagement : new editors

68% of participants on the Q&A board were new editors. 25% of new editors asked more than one question, with an average of 1.6 questions per new editor. Q&A board participation has been relatively steady during the pilot period, after an initial lull.

» New editors were very satisfied with the answers they received

Statistic	Value
Min Value	1
Max Value	5
Mean	3.86
Variance	0.8
Standard Deviation	0.9
Total Responses	63

The Q&A board seems to be a very stimulating and interactive place for new editors. 87% of respondents stated that they were 'satisfied' or 'very satisfied' with the quality of the answers on the Q&A board. 97% of editors stated that they received a follow up message from a Teahouse host after they asked their question (generally a Teahouse talkback template,and/ or a personal message).

When asked to describe what in particular they they liked about the answer they received, 22 new editors responded. Positive features they highlighted included the friendliness and promptness of the reply, as well as the personal detail of their answers and the effort that the answerer (or multiple answerers) made to clarify complex issues. One respondents also cited a negative impression that they experienced more discussion than action on their specific problem Their responses are included in table below.

Was there anything in particular you liked about the the answer your received? Tell us about it.
I recieved a number of really helpful responses from many editors about my question about translated sources.
multiple, quick responses. Able to engage in dialog.
I don't recall specifics but I believe the answer was on target and useful.
Yes, I could understand what the editor was talking about, easier here than at Help Desk.
Well, the answers were not tense.
I liked that my questions were often answered very quickly and provided me with a solution or answered my question fully
it was not just an answer but a bit of editing help as well
Nothing in particular.
friendly and fast
The person who answered fixed the specific problem I was asking about perfectly.
It seemed prompt
It was in depth easy to understand
The answer was very prompt, very courteous and very detailed!
Though I am, comparatively speaking, well-educated, I was was something of a slow learner to the editing process - and somewhat intimidated by it. The personal approach in an email took the sting out of it. The email communicated with me in a way that made the intricacies easier to understand, in part because I was addressed personally and felt the presence of a well-intended person behind the words.
I liked how it was a person who answered my question just not a machine. I also liked how quick an answer was put up. I also like how they wrote my answer so I could understand what it meant.
It was to the point and comprehensive.
Very friendly and very thorough. My question was a bit vague/large, but he/she took the time to list the steps, instances, and even the exceptions in which I wouid need to know the information he/she was providing. Great context builder.
received necessary encouragement to continue working on my submission after having an article initially rejected.
the answers were always timely and helpful. great stuff.
There's a few other editors who elaborated and gave me a more detailed explanation even though the first one already answered the question.
The wikipedia tutorials
answer was actionable and very fast. THANK YOU!

Was there anything in particular you disliked about the the answer your received? Tell us about it.
talk talk talk, except for ONE person

» Many new editors were hesitant to answer questions themselves

While 61% of new editors surveyed indicated that they had asked a question on the Q&A board, only 11% said they had answered one. This is a substantially lower percentage than we had hoped for.

When asked to describe what in particular they they liked about their experience, new editors cited a range of factors, from the promptness and quality of the answers they received to the friendly atmosphere and the ease of use. One respondents also cited dislikes, in particular that there was a lot of talk and not much action.

Statistic	Value
Min Value	1
Max Value	5
Mean	3.4
Variance	1.49
Standard Deviation	1.22
Total Responses	57

Why haven't you answered any questions on the Q&A board?
I don't feel expert enough to answer questions.
I'm new and I'm not convinced wikipedia cares about the radical change it clearly needs
I don't feel knowledgeable enough yet
Never tried.
I know I'm allowed, but don't know enough yet to answer.
I thought the Q&A board was for persons with questions; moreover, I still don't consider myself sufficiently well-versed in W's inroads to present myself as an authority.
I'll get there once I have more time under my belt.
I don't feel competent enough at wikipedia to give my advice to others yet.
I haven't wanted to spend the time to look at them.
I haven't had the time. I did comment on a question because I had had similar (bad) experiences.
I am not a native English speaker.
I was completely confused and couldn't make any sense of what any of the messages really meant. No where did I understand what I was supposed to do and where I was supposed to do it
I think I still need to ramp up a bit before taking that one
I'm very new and I don't want to answer wrongly.
I didnt login recently
Haven't come across a question where I can answer. I'd like to do it one day.
newbie

What made you decide to answer a question?
I felt that I could provide a useful suggestion in that instance.
I knew them!
I wanted to answer a question to help out at the teahouse, I knew how helpful Nthep and Sarah had been with my questions so I wanted to return the favor to other users
friendly respectful peer support
I would like to help other wikipedians with their problem and hope that we can make wikipedia a better encyclopedia
Questions were fantastic. Love to answer questions

Participation and engagement : Wikipedians

» Even experienced Wikipedians found the Q&A board a good place to get help

Experienced Wikipedians who came to the Q&A board for help were also highly satisfied with their answers, in roughly the same proportion as new editors.

Statistic	Value
Min Value	1
Max Value	5
Mean	4.11
Variance	1.21
Standard Deviation	1.1
Total Responses	19

Was there anything in particular you liked about the answer you received? Tell us about it.
1	everyone involved is awesome
2	It was friendly, polite and simple. There was no jargon, and no one sent me to other pages to read lots of stuff I didn't understand in the first place.
3	The speed of the answer and the general constructive tone of it
4	I liked the friendliness.
5	The fact that the people who answered it were sincerely trying to help me out
6	Very human and variety of comments
7	I like the fact that someone finally respond to my question when my question on other page went unanswered
8	People were nice and honest about our help pages :)
9	Concise, specific, and immediate as opposed to a list of other pages where an answer might be found.
10	Sorry I forgot what exactly the response... But because of the tea house, it was then, that the article I've created was finaly accepted ...
11	Prompt and succinct.
12	Elaborate and lucid explanation in a very caring manner.

» Half of Wikipedians who participated don't intend to participate regularly

Many Wikipedians who participated in the Q&A board did not sign up as Teahouse hosts. Survey responses indicate that more than half of the Wikipedians who didn't sign up indicated that they did not intend to participate regularly, either because they were just 'checking it out' or because they didn't have time to participate further. A small percentage of respondents (~9%) indicated that they did not know that they were allowed to sign up as hosts, or did not feel experienced enough to do so.

some other reason (please describe)
1	Unaware that you could nominate yourself as a host
2	I don't know enough to be a host.
3	I may in the future when I'm more knowledgeable on Wiki matters
4	Teahouse does not render with the modern Wikipedia skin
5	I don't think I am experienced enough to help.
6	From the start I had a negative view of the Teahouse based on an early bad experience
7	I don't think I have the qualifications.
8	choices 2 and 3, depending on what's going on in my life
9	My level of participation varies, and I'm already an adopter.
10	Because my principle is... if you dont know how to, better not to... My point is, I need to familiarize everything first, before doing such actions....

Guestbook

Summary

The Teahouse Guests page drew in fewer editors overall than the Q&A board, and unlike Q&A board participation we saw a gradual decline in the creation of new Guest profiles over the course of the pilot.

Findings

Participation and engagement : new editors

Roughly half of new editors we surveyed at the end of the pilot said that they had created a guest profile.

» New editors enjoyed browsing other guests' profiles and creating their own

Guests' levels of satisfaction with the profile creation process was comparable to the level of satisfaction reported for the Teahouse as a whole, though substantially lower than the level of satisfaction that guests reported with the answers they received on the Q&A board. This indicates that guests may have found the Q&A board more valuable overall than the guest profiles.

Guests highlighted the ease of creating a profile and the ability to browse other profiles as particularly beneficial. No guests identified any aspects of Guest profiles that they especially disliked.

Statistic	Value
Min Value	3
Max Value	5
Mean	3.80
Variance	0.44
Standard Deviation	0.66
Total Responses	30

Was there anything in particular you liked about the experience of creating an introduction? Tell us about it.
Reading the other intros gave me a good feel for the sophistication level of questions that were expected. That made the process less intimidating.
I particularly like how warm the welcome was when I introduced myself, lots of friendly editors willing to help me if I asked a question
It was good to be thought "of" - so far, I have found the whole Wikipedia experience, cold and hard to understand. The TeaHouse, seemed to be much friendlier. I should add that I am very used to networking, have done for over 30 years in my career.
It helped me get to know some people on wikipedia and gave me some framework of people i know who can help me
There was no hassle involved.
you help to fellow Wikipedian that they are not a native English speaker.
Easy if you know the basic
I'd enjoyed seeing others- I'd have considered those who went on before inspirational to my own effort
The process is relatively simple. That's what is impressive.

» Profile creation declined late in the pilot period

The number of profiles created per week was initially quite high, but the rate of creation began to decline noticeably around the middle of the pilot period. We believe this was due to a glut of profiles on the page. We have since changed the Teahouse/Guests page so that it only shows the most recently-created profiles, with a complete list of Teahouse guests and their introductions available on a separate "Guestbook" page.

» Many new editors did not know they could create a profile

Of those guests who did not create a profile, the most common reason they cited was that they "didn't know it was there". This suggests that a more visibly prominent call-to-action could increase the proportion of guests who introduce themselves.

Q: Why didn't you introduce yourself?

Statistic	Value
Min Value	1
Max Value	6
Mean	3.00
Variance	1.39
Standard Deviation	1.18
Total Responses	34

Participation and engagement : Wikipedians

Invitations

Summary

Thousands of new Wikipedia accounts are created every day, but most of them are never used for more than a couple of edits before they are abandoned. This presents both challenges and opportunites for outreach to new editors: on the one hand, focusing on only editors who highly active early on yields a small enough sample that a significant proportion of promising new editors can be personally invited by a handfull of dedicated hosts. On the other hand, since our goal was to reach out to those editors who were likely to give up quickly—whether because of Wikipedia’s lack of usability and sociability or in response to early, negative experiences—we did not want to set the bar for invitation too high and risk ignoring the very editors we set out to recruit.

Following previous research on early editing patterns associated with an increased probability of retention, we created an automated daily report of new editors who had made at least 10 edits within their first 24 hour period or who had made at least 20 edits over at least three editing sessions within their first four days. We excluded editors whose accounts were currently blocked from editing for vandalism or disruptive behavior. Teahouse hosts viewed the contribution histories of these editors and selected which ones to invite. Hosts were also encouraged to invite new editors they encountered in the course of their daily editing activities, through the feedback dashboard, the new editor contribs filter, and at offline meetup events.

Findings

» Overall response rate from direct invitations is fairly low

Hosts sent out a total of 7339 invites over the course of the pilot period, and 321 (4.5%) invitees subsequently participated in the Teahouse (asked or answered a question on the Q&A board or created a Guestbook profile). This low response rate reflects the challenge of trying to reach out to newcomers very early, before the natural ‘winnowing’ process takes effect.

» Different invitation strategies yield different response rates

Most channels from through which we invited newcomers to Teahouse yielded roughly the same response rate. However, we do see some indications that different recruitment strategies, such as inviting newcomers through particular channels and emailing, can yield slightly higher rates of response than inviting all good faith newcomers.

Number of invitations that hosts sent to new editors, by source
source
total invites sent
# invitees who visited Teahouse (Guests page, Q&A, or both)
% invitees who visited Teahouse
# who visited q&a page
% who visited q&a page
# who created a Guest profile
% who created a guest profile
New editor contrib	2227	105	4.71%	51	2.29%	68	3.05%
Database report	1500	64	4.27%	40	2.67%	36	2.40%
Other	850	23	2.71%	15	1.76%	13	1.53%
AfC	758	55	7.26%	43	5.67%	15	1.98%
Unknown	732	36	4.92%	24	3.28%	18	2.46%
Global ed	610	7	1.15%	3	0.49%	4	0.66%
Feedback dash	429	22	5.13%	14	3.26%	12	2.80%
Help desk	95	6	6.32%	3	3.16%	4	4.21%
NPP	89	3	3.37%	2	2.25%	2	2.25%
Article space	19	1	5.26%	1	5.26%	0	0.00%
Watchlist	11	2	18.18%	2	18.18%	2	18.18%
WP Feminism	10	3	30.00%	2	20.00%	2	20.00%
Event	8	1	12.50%	0	0.00%	1	12.50%
Help template	1	1	100.00%	1	100.00%	0	0.00%
Total	7339	329	4.48%	201	2.74%	177	2.41%

Inviting authors of failed AfC candidates. We see this most notably with invitations sent to new editors whose articles had been rejected by AfC. Early in the pilot, in collaboration with several Teahouse hosts, we designed a second invite template for editors who had been rejected by AfC, an especially frustrating event which can makes editors feel like they have performed a great deal of wasted work. This templatetook a sympathetic stance on the rejected editor’s plight and explicitly welcomed them to visit the Teahouse Q&A board for feedback and advice on next steps. In all, 758 new editors were invited using this template, of which 55 (7.3%) subsequently visited Teahouse.

Inviting new editors over email. Another strategy that seemed to yield a slightly higher response rate was emailing guests. Hosts were asked to send email invites to guests who had 'Email this user' enabled, in addition to posting a templated invite on the user's talk page. In a sample of 2244 Teahouse invitees who had this feature enabled, 833 received an emailed invitation to Teahouse, in addition to a welcome template, while 1411 invitees received a template only. We find that 61 (7.3%) emailed guests subsequently visited the Teahouse, compared with 72 (5.1%) templated guests. These preliminary results, while only suggestive, may indicate that reaching out to very new users through external channels such as email can enhance the 'stickiness' of community projects or Wikipedia editing in general.

» Drop-in guests and invited guests participate in different ways

Interestingly, we saw a stark differences in participation patterns of invited guests and ‘drop in’ guests (newcomers who found Teahouse without a specific invitation). For instance, out of a total of 191 guests profiles on our Guestbook page, 92% were created by invitees and only 8% by drop-in guests. By contrast, 40% of newcomers who participated on the Q&A board (by either asking a question or answering one) were drop-ins. While we can't say anything for sure, we suspect that this disparity exists because guests who had not been specifically invited may have felt relatively more comfortable performing lower-stakes activities (asking questions) than actions that signalled group identification (creating a profile).

New editor retention

In order to determine whether participating in Teahouse has a positive impact on an editors likelihood of continuing to edit Wikipedia or on their editing behaviors, we analyzed the outcomes for three groups of editors in three different 'conditions'--two different control groups and an experimental group--drawn from editors who joined between February 25th and May 19th.

Control A: 192 new editors who met the requirements to be included on the Teahouse invitee report but whose usernames were not included on that report, who were not invited through any other forum, and who did not find their way to the Teahouse on their own.
Control B: 200 new editors who were invited through the feedback dashboard, the Teahouse invitee reports and the new editor contribs filter, but did not ask a question on the Teahouse Q&A page or create an introduction box on the Teahouse/Guests page.
Experimental: 190 new editors who were invited through the feedback dashboard, the Teahouse invitee reports and the new editor contribs filter and who did edit the Teahouse/Questions and/or Teahouse/Guests pages.

Summary

We measured the level and type of activities these editors performed after the date they were invited to Teahouse (or, in the case of Control A, the date they would have been invited). The tables below present our complete data on these three samples (a 'table key' is provided below each table). We highlight particularly notable findings with charts in the bulleted list of findings below.

Table 1: editing patterns

group	ns0 bytes added	# editors with >0 NS0 edits	total global edits	avg global edits (by editor)	total articles created/edited	avg articles created/edited (by editor)	significant bytes survived per edit	survival metric per edits
Control A	1571464	141	7506	53.23404255	1319	9.4	95.18228921	181.1
Control B	5633766	158	20558	130.1139241	3177	20.1	109.5534449	230.3
Teahouse Guests	16901194	188	53072	282.2978723	17473	92.9	170.2108615	316.3

Table 1 key terms

ns0: the article namespace
# editors with >0 ns0 edits: number of editors in the group who made at least 1 edit to the article namespace after the date of invitation
significant bytes: number of bytes (excluding whitespace) added by
bytes survived: number of bytes added that had not been deleted or reverted at the time of analysis
survival metric: an average 'score' of significant bytes added per editor to the article namespace which survive across multiple subsequent revisions. Content that survives multiple revisions is considered to be higher quality or more trusted than content that only survives one subsequent revision. The more subsequent revisions an edit's content survives, the higher that edit's survival metric.

Table 2: recent activity

group	total editors	# recently active	% recently active	avg recent edits	avg recent article edits	# blocked	% blocked
Control A	192	17	9%	19.4	11.5	13	7%
Control B	200	21	11%	67.4	64.5	10	5%
Teahouse Guests	190	63	33%	121.0	92.1	12	6%

Table 2 key terms

ns0: the article namespace
recently active: number of editors in the group who made at least 1 edit to any namespace between May 23rd and June 6th
recent edits: average number of edits, per editor, between May 23rd and June 6th
blocked: editors blocked (at any time and for any duration) during the pilot period

Findings

» Teahouse guests make more article edits, and add more article content

Teahouse guests added much more content to the article namespace than members of either of the control groups. This trend was seen both in the total content bytes added by all group members, and in the per-editor averages.

	avg (by editor) ns0
Control A	11145.1
Control B	35656.7
Teahouse Guests	89900.0

Further, our results show that

more Teahouse guests made at least one edit to the article namespace
Teahouse guests edited more articles, in total and on average
Teahouse guests made more global edits (to all namespaces), in total and on average

These findings indicate that guests engaged in more editing activity than editors who did not visit the Teahouse. Interestingly, we find that Teahouse guests also made comparatively more edits to other namespaces (such as the article and user talk namespaces).

	NS0 edit ratio
Control A	0.68
Control B	0.83
Teahouse Guests	0.65

This indicates that although Teahouse guests performed more editing work on average, they also performed comparatively more work in non-article spaces (for instance, article_talk:, user_talk: and Wikipedia) than members of the control groups. This may mean that Teahouse guests participated more in talk page discussions than other editors, suggesting more community interaction.

» Contributions by Teahouse guests are more likely to survive

Not only do Teahouse guests create more article content, but our findings indicate that the content they add may be of higher quality. The graph above shows the amount of content added by members of the three groups in significant bytes (bytes of text excluding whitespace) that had not yet been deleted or reverted through the end of the pilot period.

However, this measure on its own could be misleading in some cases. For instance if Teahouse guests tended to edit many more articles that were less actively edited or watched, they would be less likely to be reverted whether or not their content was higher quality. In order to account for this possibility we compute an averaged survival metric for the three groups. This metric, developed by data analysts in the Wikimedia Foundation's Global Development department, accounts for the number of subsequent revisions that the content of each edit survives. This metric gives higher weight to content that survives through many subsequent revisions by other editors, assuming that a piece of article content has been viewed many times by other editors and has not been removed can be "trusted" to be good quality with more confidence than a piece of content that has been seen by fewer times.

We find that edits by Teahouse guests also show a higher average survival metric than those made by editors in Control groups A and B.

	Survival Metric per edits
Control A	181.1
Control B	230.3
Teahouse Guests	316.3

In order to ascertain whether editors in our control groups had made fewer contributions because they had been blocked from editing, we also analyzed how many editors in each group had been blocked (for any duration) during the preceding three months. We found no significant difference between the number of editors in each group who had been blocked.

	num_blocked	% blocked
Control A	13	7%
Control B	10	5%
Teahouse Guests	12	6%

» More Teahouse guests are still editing

The metrics presented so far do not take into account whether or not Teahouse guests are still more active than control editors. In order to find out whether or not Teahouse guests were more likely to continue editing longer than other editors, we measured the editing activity of editors in our three groups in the days immediately preceding and following the pilot period, May 23rd through June 6th.

We found that 33% of the guests in our sample had made at least 1 edit during this period (versus 9% and 11% for groups A and B, respectively), and that they had made more recent edits on average.

Although this analysis only measures short-term retention, it is an encouraging sign given that most editors who stop editing very early in their Wikipedia careers do not edit again. We intend to measure retention of members of these groups at 3, 6, and 9 months to analyze the impact of Teahouse on long term editor retention.

New editor experience: Insights

Summary

Teahouse is still under development, and we're planning to add new features. Which features would be most helpful to you?
1	My greatest concern is how well it will scale. There will be a very different vibe with 10x more guests. Perhaps have several teahouse entities?
2	less talk, more action
3	More templates, a new look and best of all, safety. When I went to teahouse, I was suspected as a sockpuppet once.
4	Some examples of how users have used the Teahouse and the results - worked examples of what is possible.
5	Again, there are a number of ways to make processes more simple and more intuitive.
6	For wikipedia in general - understanding a hierarchy for policy information
7	adopt-a-user, 'get to know board'
8	Not really a feature but greater care on part of hosts to just answer questions when they have something to contribute is always good.
9	a more catchier phrase
10	Suppose editors feature or critique some first-rate pages in the hearing of us newbies? It'd set a mark for us...

Findings

» New editors want to find collaborators and things to do

» New editors want high quality help documentation

» New editors still struggle with the Wikipedia interface

Unfortunately, new editors in 2012 struggle with many of the same problems as previous generations of newcomers.

What are some things that have been challenging for you on Wikipedia?
1	Aversion to making major edits even if an article is pretty bad. Hate to toss out another's work, don't want to invalidate anyone, and don't want to get into an edit war.
2	finding sources, formatting articles. Also no one really has edited the Battle of Verdun article in months so it's kind of lonely doing everything by myself. :)
3	Politeness. Coming from USENET I do miss not being able to say "RTFM", but it's becoming easier with practice.
4	illustrating an article (don't know what happened to picture I tried to put on Wikimedia Commons, and wasn't sure whether I should try it a different way). It was just frustrating enough, partly due to concerns about copyright issues (for early 20th century art), that I haven't gotten around to it.
5	millions of confusing and contrasting explanations, assumptions about definitions of jargon, unclear expression
6	If you ever try to remain freindly and solve a problem, you start a big problem.
7	it was difficult to create a page- i felt not enough support was given to me for this
8	rudeness - passive aggressive conduct - politicisation of subjects - systemic bias
9	When editors leave remarks, that then take ages to try and find the reason for - endless technical help pages that just confuse the issue further! And then some really excellent videos that help no end, such as the one that creates the categories at the bottom of the pages. Very easy to use and learn.
10	Understanding how to post images should be reworked - too cumbersome. Apple's developer interface is much easier to use. I have ideas abut how Wikipedia could automate the process and make it elegant and simple.
11	Finding the policy information. It seems to be strewn in different places, like there is not one clear place to start.
12	Editing in HTML for me is hugely challenging. And doing something more sophisticated than word processing, like formatting and placing an image, is formidable.
13	I don't really know what unbiased means so I had to look it up.
14	IMAGE POLIFICES and LICENSE POSTINGS (Wikimedia Commons VS regular Wikipedia image upload)
15	Making time to keep up with it. I try to log on once a week or so.
16	html, designing templates, making navboxes, uploading pictures without copyright
17	Rejects with poor explanations and poor advice (specifically - "there is a redirect fot this term X - please edit the term Y that it redirects to", though X and Y are clearly different and should not be confused nor share the same entry).
18	Even the message board is unclear as to what I am supposed to reply to or not.For example I got a message to say my entry was not sufficient yet it appeared as a finished article on the site.
19	Asking a direct simple question of an editor still not had answer....The question was simple How do I create page
20	Seeing how long an edit I make lasts before being deleted. I do NOT vandalise any article, but often my edits are deleted within days.
21	learning to edit well is a bit like learning origami from print instructions; sometimes you need several perspectives before you can actually execute a fold competently!
22	I love editing about Transport and related articles. Finding articles that I can, and that are fun to edit is often a challenge.

» New editors are excited about contributing to Wikipedia

New editors in 2012 are excited about becoming Wikipedians. Two thirds of our new editor survey respondents gave an answer to the question What are some things you are excited about doing on Wikipedia? That this is the highest response rate we received to any open-ended question (by far) only underscores the enthusiasm and energy of these new Wikipedians.

What are some things you are excited about doing on Wikipedia?
1	Learning and imparting my own knowledge at the same time is cool
2	I want to learn HTML because it could help me professionally; otherwise, the existing editors are doing satisfactory work. I like surfing Wikipedia. The editor in me likes to improve writing where it seems important, when it's needed..
3	Filling in gaps in areas where I have some knowledge and expertise.
4	Writing or expanding articles for which I have a lot of enthusiasm.
5	Bringing battle of verdun to GA status. Doing more work on WWI articles, perhaps Battle of the Somme.
6	A longitudinal study of failed RfAs. Working my way through Robbins's Encyclopedia of Witchcraft and Demonology article by article, updating wiki pages as I go.
7	The ease of editing, once you get used to the editing interface. I am still intimidated by all the techy stuff, though.
8	I'd like to be a Wikipedian in residence for a Bay Area art museum, and I think I'll come to the Edit-athon. I hope to develop more skills.
9	being a contributor, helping to bring attention to genius
10	I want to be excited, but given my experience cannot be. talk about a leading question!!!!!
11	Improving quality of articles which are relavent to me
12	makeing new articals
13	Editing it.
14	Documenting people and topics of interest to me, contributing to this platform of knowledge
15	adding to articles on topics I like and helping the fight against vandalism
16	Reading tech
17	Working with people who are interested in subjects. Addressing bias and improving neutrality.
18	Writing new articles, editing existence ones; and most of all helping making Wikipedia better and more helpful for all people!
19	I'm interested in sorting out the automotive manufacturing history of Southern Indiana and the Louisville, Kentucky areas.
20	Making it better and improving it in anyway i can
21	Writing and adding information to articles. Learning policy (which Teahouse folks helped me with greatly) as I go.
22	Contributing to (i.e., "editing") articles on topics of my specialization and, perhaps, writing one or two more articles.
23	Posting articals
24	Transmitting knowledge based on sources and providing a variety of views about a subject
25	Creating new pages, updating band discographies I love and know, and correcting small details.
26	Writing entries on important but neglected people and events
27	reading articles getting new user boxes
28	Knowing that the knowledge I possesed can be share with many people
29	Help making a difference to the world's knowledge. Improving the quality and presentation of the information given and provided valuable sources to help reserachers. I like writing about my local area and other places/ things that I know about, to increase others' knowledge of them. I also like that you don'tr have to be an expert to write about anything.
30	I like contributing to pages that reflect niche interests, and hearing from people who have seen what I've added.
31	userpage, userboxes, editing articles
32	Contributing with my knowledge. Adding to a communal effort that has great impact. Trying to avoid that my students find poor information on matters related to my courses and those of my colleagues.
33	Stopping other people from vandalising(in my opinion ruining) Wikipedia.
34	Copyediting, looking for sexism/racism/transphobia to make articles more NPOV
35	Many Article
36	learning and writing
37	I have in the past added narrative looking forward to do the same
38	editing things
39	I'd like to help burnish some of the very nice things I've seen on the pages I use and have background in- but only as necessary!
40	Adding to the overall base of knowledge.
41	Providing the most accurate information for the education of the mass.
42	About my bd institutions & army
43	Fixing grammar mistakes of course!
44	Adding references, uploading photographs to the Commons, improving grammar, adding maps, it's all fun and exciting.
45	Adding the information on Bollywood Singers