 Hi, everyone. My name is Dr. Steve Jankowski, and I'm pleased to be presenting at the Wiki Workshop 2023, where I'm going to be talking about the topic of global platform governance, multilingual policy development on Wikipedia. The project I'm working on, I'm the principal investigator, along with Dr. Claudio Salis-Pueno, Dr. Jaco Kemper, and West End Sabah, where we're working on this project that I called Slow Editing Towards Equity, where we are investigating Wikipedia's policy environment to engage and understand how it is possible to increase the equity of policies on Wikipedia. So the research background and research problem is kind of obvious where this comes from. So in 2020, in the taxonomy of knowledge gaps, it identified numerous issues that could be improved in order to allow Wikipedia to reach its goal of giving access to humanities knowledge to everyone. And while Wikipedia's policies are useful for creating high quality content, they can be major barriers for diverse content inclusion. So partly this has been identified. One of the issues or the elements of Wikipedia's policy environment is that the policies tend to be conservative. They were sort of calcified many years ago. There's a lack of activity now. And so we want to investigate some of the ways that we can increase the capabilities of policies being an instrument of increasing equity. Of course, there are numerous studies that have been engaged. We look at Wikipedia's environment, looking at its providing feminist critiques of the environment, as well as individual policies. So this is sort of where we're starting from. This research is based in theories with immediate studies, well, feminist science and technology studies, mostly concentrating on the aspect that our values, our practices, our beliefs oftentimes can be encoded into the technical and political structures that we engage with. Right. So, you know, unpacking those structures allows us to understand how politics is at play in something like Wikipedia. Okay. So that leads us to this moment to think about which socio-technical actions could be followed to reform Wikipedia's policy environment. This is our overarching sort of research question. It's quite broad. And so we need to dive in a bit deeper to get it specific. So our research questions are based on two premises. The first one, any attempt to change Wikipedia policy has to be supported by pre-existing practices is necessary to know what those practices are. And so Wikipedia prides itself in the precedent of community practices. And so any attempt to adjust it needs to be based in what's already happening. And the second premise, Wikipedia's have already attempted to make the platform's policies more equitable. What are they? What successes did they have? And which failures did they encounter? So currently we are working on the endpoint of research question one. How do Wikipedians develop successful policy proposals across language additions? And then afterwards we'll be addressing how are these practices reflected in Wikipedia efforts to increase knowledge equity. So our concentration is really honed in on policy development. How does a particular policy move from the stage of, let's say a draft or an essay and then move into something like a guideline or an official policy? And ideally we want to know what are the sort of skills that are required to move these works along this, along this path. Of course not all policies follows the path of draft to proposal to essay to guideline to policy. They go back and forth. Some of them jump from one stage to another. And we want to investigate how that happens. And so that we can understand the process better and then give better ideas about how we might perform policy. So the main corpus for research question one comes through looking at first we looked at five language additions Arabic, Dutch, English, French and Spanish. We looked at or assembled a corpus of all the major policies and guidelines for each of those additions using some of the lists available on each edition to navigate that. And then we wanted to make a purposeful homogenous sampling criteria for each of these for three additions, three policies per edition. We originally set out with 10, but that was that was too much. So we reduced it to three. And so we wanted it to be these policies to be representative of what we could expect if someone is wanting to know how to reform or produce a new new policy. So it should be the policies we looked at were ones that were created after 2005. Because that was when the process of making policies start to be formalized. We wanted to see examples where there was a policy that had been drafted beforehand. In case we were able to find that where it was sort of a full draft before, like in the first edit or first couple of edits. We wanted to be highly visited. So there's plenty of activity, highly wiki link so it's representative of sort of community consensus about its value, and that it also had development moments that we could analyze. So we came up with these three policies per edition, and we wanted to examine them through four different ways. The first one is just sort of a straightforward content analysis of the edit history, looking for templates and changes to the status of the policy. We ended up from all 15 as a total, we found 151 policy status changes. And we used 22 codes to identify what those changes are usually just using the actual templates that are used in wiki text as as the codes. Sometimes we had to change a few. The second pass is a qualitative content analysis of the edit history. So we went through the edits of each of these policies. 200, 2548 edits. In total, looking forward particular kinds of skills and users user roles. We did it again through the top page to look through for discussion, and we are currently working on the looking at the way that composition plays an important role of as a skill on Wikipedia policy development. The yellow there is where we're going to where we're currently working. Okay, so some preliminary results. We have, we noticed that most of the status changes happen in the first month of policies that some policies have complicated development histories like reliable sources has about 50 moments of change, which is compares to something like the French edition, which has very few changes in terms of status so that's an interesting thing to consider that we'll be considering and thinking about. So there's a number of different social roles that we have identified, like brainstormers deontic experts policy environment experts scope of the fires, etc. And in case these are preliminary results as we're still in the process of doing the work. We have a couple of steps left of this process of this research question before we move on to the second one. I think wraps up pretty much everything that I want to say about her topic. So thank you for your time, and I will gladly take any questions you have about the presentation during the q&a.