[17:16:09] hm, time to revert the channel topic back to the usual one now that the Research Showcase is over? :) [17:58:57] Nettrom: I can change the topic, what's the usual message, do you have it? [17:59:25] bmansurov: "The official channel of Wikimedia Research. The Science must Flow! Channel is publicly logged @ https://wm-bot.wmflabs.org/logs/%23wikimedia-research/" [18:00:34] Nettrom: thanks [18:00:40] bmansurov: no, thank you! :) [18:30:14] isaacj: I was thinking about the question of nationality or native language. [18:31:31] isaacj: while farsi gives you a relatively good indication of culture (though even that is spoken in at least 3 countries with different cultures), english can break the analysis of the impact of culture based on the question. for example, Nigerians will perhaps primarily report english as their native language. [18:32:23] isaacj: what do you think? it may be worth to do some more iterations on the thread to figure out what's possible in terms of asking about nationality. Do you want to check with Markus? I think Clemens may have an answer about the exact wording (or even questions) we can ask, and we can discuss the specific question further. [18:32:42] isaacj: (sorry for going back on this. I just realized it.) [19:05:36] lzia: yeah, i understand your concerns. i'm willing to work on nationality with the team. Personally, there are still a few reasons i prefer language over nationality: [19:05:49] * It's way less sensitive. my personal take is that even if we get a better question around culture/nationality, i feel like we will have 4 relatively non-sensitive demographic questions (in the sense that they are pretty broad) and then one very sensitive demographic question that might turn away a lot of individuals [19:05:49] * I haven't thought of a great way to analyze the answers we might get to nationality questions. There likely will be no good way to pre-set the answers and open-text will be very difficult to systematically evaluate at scale and map to some notion of status. [19:05:49] * I actually think that language is more interesting to me than nationality. While an imperfect proxy for culture, language is a really important component of Wikipedia. So knowing native language gets at other questions like whether the person is likely on a Wikipedia where they would feel most comfortable in terms of reading/editing. [19:09:28] language doesn't solve all of these problems. it's certainly sensitive in many contexts (e.g., many countries have banned languages from being taught/spoken in the past) and like you said, people might report one language as their native even though from our standpoint, that they also natively speak a more local language might be more what we're interested in learning. but i guess it still feels much more appropriate for this survey for [19:09:29] the reasons above [19:29:40] isaacj: I see your points (and the one sensitive question is a very good one for me). I do think it's good to have a chat with Clemens about this as well, to get his input. To give you some more context: almost a year ago, dsaez, Bob and Carlos Castillo talked about looking into the role of diversity for content production in Wikipedia. [19:29:45] isaacj: There were quite a few questions discussed, some of which can be expanded or deepened by the question of where the reader or editor is "from". We don't have to collect that data now, but it's good to get an answer about whether some of kind of question on that front is possible, and if yes, what is the wording of it. (this should not block the current survey and privacy statement work, btw) [19:31:35] lzia: that sounds reasonable to me. i'll reach out to the team then and work on developing a question that captures this and if we end up in a good place, we can see about incorporating it now (or worst case we'll have a question prepared for future surveys) [19:34:07] isaacj: sounds good. thanks. and please do what we call time-boxing. If you see it requires a lot of iteration, drop it on me. [19:35:10] lzia: gotcha and excellent word! i'm adding time-boxing to my repertoire [19:36:20] isaacj: ;) [21:38:41] dsaez: I <3 how you submitted a version for SIGIR now. [21:38:56] dsaez: you're my role-model for early activity on submissions. :D [21:39:18] just the Abstract [21:39:50] the origal plan was to submit the full paper before Christmas, so not that in advance ;) [22:26:54] haha, finishing the week on a high note! [22:32:00] dsaez, lzia: w00t! [22:33:18] deadline is on January 28th. 10 days before might be also my personal record. [22:33:53] scary [22:47:50] DarTar: yeah. I'm reconsidering my co-authorship with this person. I'm stressed. :P [22:48:56] dsaez: fun fact. Jure did an analysis a while back showing that there is a meaningful correlation between acceptance rate and time the final version is submitted. The closer you submit to the deadline, the higher the chance of submission. (not causal, hopefully :D) [22:51:39] interesting