Interviewed by Thibbs

This issue we interview Sam Walton, who has recently joined the ranks of WP:VG's helpful mop-handlers. Samwalton9 is active in both the video game arena as well as the scientific arena, and he has given additional support at The Wikipedia Library as a metrics coordinator. So without further ado, let us pull back the curtain and ask a few questions to see what drives him.

1. What drew you to Wikipedia, and what prompted you to begin editing?

   My memory isn't great, but it seems my first edits were trivial changes to keep things up to date. I then found Special:RecentChanges and reverted some vandalism. After doing bits and pieces here and there in early 2012, I then lost interest for some time. In 2013 I came across a deletion discussion linked from somewhere, which opened my eyes to the 'background' areas of Wikipedia that I wasn't aware existed before then. That piqued my interest again and it wasn't long before I found WikiProject Video games and began editing VG articles!

2. What's the significance of your username? How did you select it?

   Since I was a child my idol was the great Sam Walton. Just kidding, it's my name, I didn't even know who Sam Walton was until a few years ago, and the 9 is pretty much meaningless, no interesting stories to tell there!

3. How did you become involved with the VG project?

   As I mentioned before, after learning that there were background organisational areas of Wikipedia I quickly came across WP:VG, likely through the talk page of a video game article. Having added myself to the members list, I started editing Realm of the Mad God which I think I remember finding through some 'articles that need attention' page somewhere in WP:VG. I then spent most of my first 6-12 months primarily editing in VG project articles and areas.

4. How much of a gamer are you and what type of games do you gravitate toward?

   Gaming is a fair amount of my free time besides editing Wikipedia! I'm a PC gamer and at the moment I'm primarily playing Dota 2 (1100 hours and counting) and Grand Theft Auto V. I'm not sure there's a particular game type that I gravitate towards, though I'm always interested in 'Art games' and those that try to do something a bit different; you'll notice a number of the games I've written about are those that I found different and interesting rather than necessarily popular.

5. The WP:VG Newsletter had cause to congratulate you on an important change in user rights back in 4th quarter of 2014. How has becoming an administrator affected your activities within the project?

   I've definitely spent less time writing articles since becoming an admin, though I've not stopped entirely. Becoming an admin coincided roughly with a slowdown in my WP:VG-related editing anyway; I've spent more of my time in other areas since then, though I've still found time to write articles on VG subjects that particularly interested me.

6. Since your own RfA, you have participated in a number of RfAs for other candidates. What is your candid assessment of the process? Is it unduly lax or stringent, or is it pretty well applied on balance? Do you have any advice for WP:VG members who might be interested in either acting as an administrator or otherwise participating in an RfA?

   It's a difficult topic, though I'm certain that it needs changing in some capacity; we're not promoting enough admins and regardless of whether it's definitely the case, most users point to RfA as being the primary reason for that. I do think that, generally speaking, we're unduly hard on candidates, but I don't think it's as horribly broken as some like to claim. My primary advice for members interested in becoming an admin is to make sure you're prepared to put on a thick skin, and to remember that regardless of what is brought up or discussed at your RfA, your contributions to Wikipedia are still valued and you should try not to be dismayed if you don't pass. There's plenty of important things that need doing without the admin tools.

7. In which areas of Wikipedia have you involved yourself beyond WikiProject Video Games?

   I've been through quite a few different areas; while I start off in WP:VG, I've since become interested in writing about scientists (particularly female scientists and those from the 19th/20th century). As for my non-article work, I've most recently been getting involved in edit filters, including attempts to revamp our rules and documentation.

8. The WMF issued a stark demographic report in 2011 which was corroborated and re-affirmed by independent academic studies in the years since then. There is little reason to assume that WP:VG's demographic statistics diverge much from the WMF-reported findings. What are your thoughts on systemic bias and the gender gap at Wikipedia? Why is it important for Wikipedia that under-represented groups participate? Why is it important for under-represented groups that they become involved? Is it possible that addressing the systemic bias in content with our current pool of editors will have a concomitant dis-incentivizing effect on editors from underrepresented groups who might otherwise be spurred to action by the clear need for articles on their pet topics?

   I think it's one of the biggest meta issues we face; it's much harder to write a neutral encyclopedia based on the world's knowledge if a category containing one half of the world isn't fully represented here. While facts are facts and anyone should be able to write them, it's inevitable that certain topics will continue to receive different amounts of attention on Wikipedia while we have an imbalanced editor pool. I don't expect that underrepresented groups would be disincentivized if content surrounding topics that interest them was created; I think, actually, that the exact opposite would be the effect. While there are many editathons and editing drives surrounding topics with low numbers of articles (female scientists as one example), I think the presence of such articles is more likely to encourage editors to get involved than if those articles simply aren't here at all. If nothing else it's much easier to edit an existing article than create a new one! It's a complicated issue though, and these are my own ramblings on the topic; there are people with much more well researched views than me.

9. Which article(s) are you most proud of writing or do you believe exemplifies your best work?

   Proteus is probably my best written article (though due credit has to be given to all the other editors who have contributed to the article), though I'm proud of all the articles I've written on lesser known, particularly female, scientists, and most recently of Johnnie Mae Chappell which is regarding a pretty important and seemingly forgotten event.

10. What are your plans for the immediate future? Are there any projects with which you are currently involved or which you are thinking about starting?

    I actually don't have any big Wikipedia plans right now. My last project has been improving the edit filter, which is just about coming to a close with the RfC and I don't honestly have anything in the queue.

11. You currently serve as The Wikipedia Library's metrics coordinator. How did you get interested in metrics and data visualization? What do you find to be the most useful tools for your analyses? Is Wikipedia data your main interest or do you provide metrics for other WMF projects as well?

    As a recent astrophysics graduate (now PhD student) I have a big interest in data. When I saw that Wikipedia Library resource pages were being created with metrics sub-pages planned I enquired as to when they might be posted; the response I received was for them to ask if I was interested in collating and reporting the data, which I expressed my interest in! Since this is a collaborative project (and among non-scientists) the data is collected and presented using Google Sheets which makes it easy for us to share and discuss the data. I use a wider range of tools in my scientific research, but Sheets works well enough for our needs. I currently only provide metrics for TWL.

12. Can you talk to us a little about balance? How do you personally balance Wikipedia and real life, and how do you balance your WP:VG activities with your activities in the rest of the 'pedia?

    If I had to summarise in a word it would be badly. I spend a lot of time looking at my watchlist, whether at a computer or on my phone, and it certainly holds more of my attention than it maybe should, so I don't really have a good answer for how I balance Wikipedia and my other activities. As for WP:VG/everything else - I tend to just edit what takes my fancy. I haven't been tying myself down to any big article-related projects, but I do keep more of an eye on WP:VG topics (AfDs, WT:VG, etc.) than other wikiprojects, so it naturally takes up a bit more of my time than other projects.

13. What do you consider the most difficult part of editing at Wikipedia?

    I find navigating and explaining the myriad of policies and guidelines to be one of the most awkward areas of Wikipedia at the moment. While new editors don't take long to get to grips with actually making edits, sourcing content, etc., the policies and guidelines are something that users naturally take a long time to get to grips with and fully understand. I think the pages currently do a good job of explaining what you should and shouldn't do, but aren't so great at explaining the why. I've considered short videos for policy/guideline pages aimed at new editors, but I don't know if that would actually help.

14. What advice would you give a new editor interested in working on video game articles?

    Get involved with the WikiProject! That might sound a little cliche coming in the project's newsletter but it honestly is the best way to get involved in the area. The talk page and various subpages, categories, and guidelines were so helpful for me when I started editing, and I certainly wouldn't have got as involved as I did if not for the project.

15. Anything else you want to say?

    Nothing in particular, thanks for interviewing me!