I feel that wikiHow in 2025 has gotten worse compared to mid 2010s in my opinion.

wikiHow today has:

  • quizzes, and some articles that are not how-to articles
  • content licensed under a proprietary license that prohibits reuse outside wikiHow
  • Staff-written articles
  • Some articles and all quizzes are protected to admins only
  • Page creation is restricted to autoconfirmed users
  • MediaWiki version that is unsupported and almost six years old (1.33)

wikiHow in 2013-2017 had:

  • All content licensed under CC BY-NC-SA, which allows reuse for non-commerical purposes
  • Just how-to articles, all written by volunteers
  • Lower barriers to publishing pages
  • Ran current version of MediaWiki at that time
  • Access to special pages by anonymous users
  • Edit links at every section, not just at top

So, what are others’ opinions on wikiHow today, compared to mid 2010s?

7 Likes

A wise man once said:

4 Likes

In my opinion, I think wikiHow in 2025 has gotten a bit better but also a lot worse

You know, I too feel some things on wikiHow have gotten worse…but I also feel like in some ways things have gotten better, all through knowing just what isn’t working. I feel though that what isn’t working now will develop a different way of encountering these issues later. So be mindful.

While we do allow many people of all walks of life to contribute here, if you need to step away while things even out, do understand that we are all volunteers and can come and go as we please.

Take @Eric ’s quote above to heart, because they are a wise person.

2 Likes

I’ve been an on-again, off-again wikiHow community member for over 18 years now. Over that time, countless things have changed — and I’ll admit, I get nostalgic sometimes for the way things used to be. But I’ve also seen how much the internet as a whole has evolved during that time. We’ve moved from an era where a site like wikiHow could thrive on simple, text-only ads and mostly text-based articles, to one where algorithm changes and shifting reader behavior have required serious adaptation just to stay afloat.

You’ve probably heard the phrase “the only constant is change” — and that feels especially true when you’re trying to maintain a thriving site across decades. If wikiHow hadn’t evolved and made some of the tough decisions it has, I honestly don’t think we’d still be here today.

Another thing I’ve noticed over the years is that some folks come in from Wikipedia or similar projects and expect things to operate the same way here. The truth is, aside from both being wikis, wikiHow has its own culture, guidelines, and policies that have developed over time to fit the unique goals of this community. If you come in expecting things to match other platforms, it can be really hard to feel like you fit in. In some cases, it’s just not a match — and if that ends up being true for you, I genuinely hope you find a space online that brings you joy and gives you that sense of belonging.

14 Likes

Agree. I’m not a big fan of articles that are not how-to articles, especially stuff like “What is a Rizz” and term definitions for things that will probably be forgotten or laughed at for being so aggressively early 2020s. Nothing against the wikiHow team - I know they’re all trying new things and trying to figure out how to improve the site in a more current way (hey we all know the internet kiiiind of sucks right now : P) but it’d be nice if they could step back a bit with the newer stuff (I don’t even check new articles anymore since everything is made by staff) and go back a bit to when the users were making morehow-to articles.

3 Likes

Remember that last year I resigned from actively contributing to wikiHow. This is my resignation letter from February 19, 2024:

Today I’m saying goodbye to wikiHow. I would like to thank you for the seven years I volunteered on wikiHow in English and Spanish, the latter being my native language. These seven years would not have been possible without the contributions of the site’s administrators and staff members who have been kind enough to help me with my challenges.

See it at: My farewell to wikiHow

1 Like

Apologies for the word vomit ahead. This is not a planned-out post, therefore it’s not that eloquent, but I thought I should share my opinions on this anyway. These are just a few of my thoughts. I just want to preface this by saying I am someone who does hold a high opinion of wikiHow generally. If I didn’t, I wouldn’t keep contributing. I am making these points in good faith.

I agree with some points here (especially @ChocoCat1122 ) and I appreciate that this is a productive conversation where different viewpoints are actively being considered. I am not opposed to every change on wikiHow, nor am I against wikiHow as a whole, but as someone who has been frequently contributing to wikiHow for coming up to eight years, I have lost some enthusiasm recently. Part of the reason I have been taking wikiBreaks for the past year or so is just personal real-life commitments which have taken up a lot of my time, but I also feel quite sceptical over how much impact I am making. It can be hard to keep up with updates and policy changes here, which is part of the reason I have been putting off my return. I also fail to see how a lot of the updates contribute to wikiHow’s mission . It feels as though volunteer contributions have been made insignificant. I understand there will be changes, and reasons for said changes, as well as the fact not everyone will agree with everything on this site, but personally some things just pull me futher from wikiHow, and I am saying this as someone who has a lot of respect for this site and genuinely wants to contribute more.

I feel like quizzes and non how-to articles are basically unavoidable. A lot of which are based on pop culture and I don’t find to be that meaningful. I understand not all articles on wikiHow are that serious, and that’s okay, but they seem to be dominating wikiHow at this point. Looking at the home page, most articles seem to be staff written, that I do wonder what volunteers are getting up to these days.

One of wikiHow’s key policies has always been ‘quality over quantity’, and it has been made clear that we should focus on how-tos. I was quite young when I started editing on wikiHow and I made a lot of mistakes and there were many kind people to keep me on track and remind me to focus on wikiHow’s goal. I just wonder how I would fare had I started wikiHow the way it currently is. I would have struggled even more to write quality articles, I think, when artcles like ‘Am I a Rizzy Sigma’ exist (not saying that article isn’t well-written, although I haven’t read it, just that there seems to be a focus on churning out as many articles on as many topics as possible, just for the sake of views). I also still don’t fully understand where volunteers lie on the matter of non how-to articles. Is it a staff only thing?

Personally, I would rather just focus on how-to articles. I can’t stop other people from doing what they want, however. The problem is that the non how-tos are impossible to avoid, you just have to go to the spellchecker to see. I also don’t know how to remove those new panels on my userpage (personality profile and forum), but that might just be a me problem, as I am having difficulty editing my profile anyway.

It just feels weird growing from one of those young editors who was (quite rightly) coached on sticking to wikiHow’s mission over getting distracted by side projects (does anyone remember when projects were a big thing, and there would be one for every topic, or making templates, deigning user pages?), to being more ‘traditional’. I would rather I wrote an article that only has a couple of hundred views, but made an impact on a couple of hundred people, than a more popular article or quiz that exists solely for the purpose of entertainment.

I suppose I am just confused about what the purpose of wikiHow is at this point and where I fit in.

If people don’t enjoy spending their time on wikiHow, then they are unlikely to invest their time here. As a reminder, nobody is obligated to participate. I would hope that if people are unhappy on wikiHow, they can find another place where they can be happy.

Something I agree with in part, but also I think some of us want to participate more, but just don’t really understand or agree with the direction wikiHow is going in. I love contributing to wikiHow and I plan to continue, but these days I sometimes feel unfulfilled. It seems everything is about AI, getting clicks and internet algorithms these days, which is not the reason I contribute to wikiHow. I choose to contribute because I believe in making an impact, of whatever size, to someone’s life.

What I have always loved in wikiHow, is the human aspect. We have always had a brilliant community, and there have been many people on here which I would consider (online) friends, although many have come and gone for whatever reason (and I wish them all the best). wikiHow has never been a perfect website, and it never will be, because our articles are all written by humans (and I think/hope they still all are), but that has always meant there has been more to do, and a sense of achievement when you do something you put a lot of effort in, whether it be writing/editing an article, or reducing backlog. These days, I sometimes feel like ‘someone else could do it’, which puts me off making contributions.

I don’t say any of this with ease. I don’t like having to criticise a website I am very fond of. I have nothing but respect for all staff and volunteers on here. I just think this is important to say, from the perspective of someone who has always enjoyed contributing to wikiHow.

10 Likes

Lol I originally didn’t think it was necessary to respond to this thread since most people wrote what I was going to say. But I’ve found some other points to say.

  • I’ve been a bit busy with school (AP testing and early finals/projects are starting in a few weeks) so I haven’t been contributing to the main site so much. I want to contribute, but real life has gotten busy. It’s not related to what I have to say below. I’m not stopping to contribute since I believe the site sucks- that’s untrue!
  • I have noticed how commercial wikiHow has gotten. There are several articles mentioning product names (since they are recommending specific products to use) which say they will provide a commission if we used the provided links. However, there is still a rule saying we can’t use the names of specific products in articles since that counts as advertising. I believe this is slightly hypocritical; wikiHow was not meant to advertise or recommend products to viewers. But now those types of articles are all over the site. It’s kind of sad to see that websites have to include advertising to survive nowadays.
  • There are also so many non-how to articles being made. The whole purpose of wikiHowwas to “ Learn how todo anything ”. But now, staff are now allowed to make articles that belong more on an entertainment site like Yahoo or Buzzfeed. Some of the articles (like 170+ Best Useless Facts That Sound Like Lies , 26 Highly Overrated Things ) just seem like random fact articles or opinion articles to me. I remember I saw this article a few years ago and the only reason it wasn’t deleted was to promote the “Free Guy” movie. I actually wanted to NFD it since it sounded like a joke article, but it continued to be there. I found my post about that article in the forums lol.
  • It’s also not that fair when only staff are allowed to make these articles. I know they are the ones testing out new features for the site, but these articles have been made for a while already. At least make these features more accessible to regular volunteers, since people like us are the main people contributing to the site!
  • Articles like Fun & Easy Ways to Celebrate Easter with Loved Ones are still how-tos; they just don’t start with “How to”. I think those articles are fine. It’s just another way to write a how-to article without using the prefix.
  • I don’t mind the quizzes. They’re fun to take and they might increase engagement on wikiHow. Online quizzes are very popular these days, so this feature may make the site more relevant in 2025. I’ve seen people on social media comment on these quizzes and the results they got. This may help wikiHow to be seen by more people (since most young people have social media currently).

So in summary, I am a bit disappointed in some policies wikiHow has implemented. At the same time, I believe some of the new features are fun and engaging.

7 Likes

I debated against posting here, but I guess some points are worth echoing, contextualizing, or adding to.

I’ve been here for over 13 years. Very present for 2011-2013, came and went frequently for the next few years, vanished nearly completely around 2017, and now I’m back. Because of the irregularity of these data points, I’ve never had the luxury of acclimating to gradual change. Everything has always been rather sudden, but I don’t mind that.

I’ve certainly disagreed with directions the staff have taken over the years and vocalized such disagreements. Perhaps not as loudly or brashly as others, but they were there. Coming back at the end of 2024 was probably the starkest difference I have seen thus far. I can’t and won’t offer commentary on whether I think quizzes, defining slang, etc. should exist. That is sort of the nature of the internet these days. If you do not innovate, you will be left behind. We have lost the ability to survive off of ad revenue from how-to articles alone. If this type of content as well as paid promotions (as long as these are heavily reviewed before implementation) is what’s needed to “subsidize” the less profitable how-to core of wikiHow, so be it. C’est la vie. It’s also worth noting that the staff live, work, and occupy office space in one of the top 15 most expensive areas in the world , which to me has always seemed like an unjustifiable quirk that nobody has ever really talked about.

I’m certainly not a fan of the “rules for thee, not for me” tone that policies have taken over the years. Today, it feels like that if I were to open up a policy page, it would list more exceptions to the policy than actual rules. I often stumble across old articles and wonder how nobody deleted it in a decade. Articles that shouldn’t have survived the NAB process at all , demoted or not. But then other articles which certainly fit the deletion criteria are exempt because they were written by a staff member or expert reviewed 10 years ago. Garbage is garbage, regardless of whose name is attached to it.

The core group of editors has also shrunk. You will tend to see the same names every day with a few sporadic bursts of activity from long-time editors. Years ago, you would see more of those names. Now, I can probably count them on both hands. Long-time editors that were essential to my formative time here whose accounts have either gone dormant or straight up deleted by their own request. People that spent years of their lives here before I arrived, that I got to know and interacted with daily, and that I never thought would leave. Gone and never to return. Why did they go? I know the answer for some of them and it’s in line with the feelings of others here, but others I could only imagine. I deeply miss my friends.

I strongly appreciate the work that the WRM, Seymour Edits, and Wikivisual accounts put out. I find it generally well-written, well-sourced, and well-researched. I think Wikivisual in particular is a massive benefit. It had some dubious years outsourcing low-quality content from developing nations, but we’ve moved past that. I think there’s now a distinct visual style users across the internet associate with wikiHow, largely due to Wikivisual and the unknown names behind it. On the other hand, we would often use the phrase “content farm” with incredible disdain years ago. We didn’t want any work from content farms and we certainly didn’t want any association with them. Here we are now, in 2025, a high-quality content farm with volunteers. There’s no simpler way to put it. The sheer amount of content put out by the staff every day as well as the fact that it is optimized for online visibility and to hijack virality or trends is textbook content farm.

But here we are. Here I am. I will inevitably disappear again and come back again in the future if past patterns are indicative of what I am likely to do. Life often gets in the way and competing interests change daily habits. But for the meantime, I’m not going anywhere.

Don’t feel bad. You’re not criticizing out of a position of hatred. You love this place, just like I do, and you recognize its faults and wish for it to do and be better.

8 Likes

Sorry for the long post here but…
I have been on wikiHow for almost 7 months now, and I love the website, the people are friendly and caring, but it just gets boring sometimes on the main site. Personally I think that the wikiHow website has become one of my go-to resources for everything from simple life hacks to more complex projects. It’s like having a friend who knows a little about everything, ready to share their wisdom with a friendly, upbeat tone. The step-by-step guides are easy to follow and often sprinkled with just the right amount of humor, which makes learning all the more enjoyable. I truly appreciate the effort they put into making information accessible and entertaining at the same time. Plus, the illustrations are often a fun touch that enhances the experience. Overall, I feel that wikiHow strikes a fantastic balance between professionalism and a light-hearted approach, making it a valuable tool for anyone looking to improve their skills or tackle new challenges. It’s hard not to smile when you’re finding practical solutions while feeling like you’re chatting with a friend!:smiley:

Here are some pros and cons of the website:One of its significant pros is the accessibility of information; users can quickly find guidance on nearly any subject imaginable. Additionally, the collaborative nature of the site allows for continuous updates and improvements, ensuring that the content remains relevant. However, there are some cons to consider, such as varying levels of article quality since contributions come from multiple authors. Furthermore, the site can sometimes be overwhelming due to the sheer volume of content available, which may lead to information overload. Overall, while WikiHow offers a convenient way to learn and solve problems, it is important for users to approach its articles with a discerning eye.

That is personally my opinion on it, again sorry for the long post, but I won’t disappear (not for a very long time) but sometimes I have either school or work that I have to go to and with state tests coming up, I will be very busy and not have time sure, but I will be back to wikiHow for some time though, it’s not like it’s forever you know.

3 Likes

To be fair, I love wikiHow and honestly it’s gotten better. Let’s be real, wikiPedia’s cool and all, but it’s complicated, they still haven’t updated their page to fit the 2025 website standards, and their community isn’t as strong.

In the beginning, wikiHow started as a simple how-to website, and now, in 2025, things have gotten people more attracted to it! First off, let’s start with quizzes. They are a fun way to get readers to know more about themselves, and read articles about their results when they finish. Next, there’s the community. Honestly, the forums is just a big place where we all talk about wikiHow or non-wikiHow. And lots of friendships have been made, and lots of people have been celebrated, it’s honestly amazing. wikiHow’s website style also got a lot better, changing to it’s iconic green color. NFD articles and other funny articles have gotten popular (some kids in my class were laughing while reading “How to Breathe”), not to mention quizzes are getting better with wikiVibes and wikiPoints.

So wikiHow is already fun for its users, but Patrolling, making articles, welcoming, and chatting is even more fun for users, I know @JayneG has a good time leading Community Achievements and leading other wikiHow things (commander in chief!). Now, it’s gotten so well it has a YouTube channel, Guides you can buy, an app, and even a… a PARTY GAME!? wikiHow is amazing, it has gotten sooo much better, and I hope it can continue to get even better over the years. Love ya’ll, mic drop.:microphone:

4 Likes

Wait, there’s a game? Off-topic, but I’m curious now.

1 Like

it’s very late at night, i’m ill, and i haven’t been on here in ages, so i apologize if precisely none of this makes sense or is relevant. i was also very young when i started editing, much younger than i said i was upon joining (surprise, i guess…? it feels weird finally admitting to having lied about my age on the site i once spent hours on daily), so i may be partially blinded by nostalgia and my past ineptness. i intend all of this in good faith and apologize in advance if my tone ever strays from that.

i miss the simplicity of old wikihow, when it was the place to be whenever you needed to know how to do something. now, it feels much less personal and catered to that particular niche; i don’t quite understand why wikihow is trying to become urban dictionary.

i also feel like the spotlight has been shifted off of the volunteers who built this site up in the first place; sometimes this site feels so overtly commercial, but i understand that running a site so foundational to the modern internet comes with a cost. still, i miss how community-based the site used to be. i miss the people i would roleplay with on the forums or add to my wikifriends list when i was eleven. i miss the people who would coach me for focusing too much on user info boxes or being too overbearing when starting out as a welcomer. i miss seeing the group of 20 or 30 names that seemed to grow weekly on recent changss patrol.

regardless, i want to thank everyone, past and present, who has contributed to wikihow. thank you to the frequent patrollers, the admins, the anonymous editors, whoever was behind seymour edits and wikivisual. regardless of whether or not i personally approve of the direction the site has taken after my disappearance, we’re ultimately the ones who built up this site in the first place.

5 Likes

I apologize for bumping this thread, but I have a couple brief things I want to throw out there in regards to this conversation.

Echoing much of what was said before, I understand that commercialization is an inevitable albeit unfortunate consequence of the way online sites operate in this time and age. Despite the questionable “helpfulness” or relevancy of staff created, mass-produced topics, these pages are immensely popular and help keep wikiHow up and running.

However, some recent partnerships have made me disheartened as to the extent to which wikiHow is commericalizing. I recall a conversation I had with another editor over email last summer concerning this article , which was created as an ad for the company LELO. By now, its been protected for admin/staff editing only.

Commercial partnership articles naturally violate the nfd|adv clause of the Deletion Policy, but this page made me take a step back because its a double violation of nfd|sex as well. In addition, previous community consensus and precedent is clear in that this particular title should remain unwritten: the title was deleted 17 times between 2005 and 2007 before being blacklisted. Writing over these rules in order to facilitate a partnership seems destructive.

Secondly, I’d like to voice some concerns about the effectiveness of the article creation restrictions implemented in August 2023. Personally, writing my first article is what largely got me looking into all other facets of wikiHow life–and what motivated me to stay. Many, many new users ask about article creation, but once sent {{newarticle}}, they hardly stay long enough or contribute enough to be able to start their article. We’re losing a lot of potential editors and contributors to the autoconfirmation rule.

I know this policy is meant to decrease spam/AI pages, and I became a booster only after this fix, but I think its honestly worth the NAB backlog to have potentially beneficial pages in quality review. More articles means more active users, and therefore more contributors who could potentially stay long-term. The publication rate for new articles is low even with the restriction, and the policy’s other intended effect of guaranteeing responsible authorship doesn’t translate into producing more boostable pages (though this is only from my own NAB experience, not sure what others are encountering).

I’ve always considered article creation to be more of a volunteer-side thing (after all, isn’t the idea to allow people from all over the world to share their insights?), but WRM seems to be vastly outstripping volunteer writers in creating published pages. Corporate partner articles like the one I mentioned above help the site stay up, but, if new users are unable to make pages, isn’t wikiHow “staying up” without leveraging much of the potential of our reader-editors? The WRM team is great at filling content holes with excellent, informative articles, but they don’t need to do it so… alone.

wikiHow holds a special place in my heart and always will. Where I live, the spring sunlight coming through the trees casts everything in a brilliantly warm wikiHow green, which makes me immediately think of the many enjoyable hours I’ve spent here. It always makes me want to come online and get to editing. Maybe I’m just an overly sentimental person, but this sort of thing is what has made me as happy as always to contribute. I think its worth reconsidering some of the newer policies to help rebuild volunteer engagement and entice more people to stick around.:heart::slight_smile:

10 Likes

You mentioned a few staff articles violating nfd|adv and nfd|sex, and that made me remember that I came across an article while patrolling that was simply “Tips to increase [EXPUNGED]” (I’ll let you think up what that might have been), and would have NFD’d it but, lo and behold, only sysop can edit. Am I shocked? No. What does shock me, however, is that those articles are on the site, uncensored, where an 8 year old could run across them by clicking a total of 5 links (even starting at a Pokemon article). To take it even further, the article had Wikivisual-style images of adult toys (almost completely uncensored), but they were uploaded by an admin account (NOT staff). Reading through the article, it seems to be an advertisement for an adult toy company. How did we get here…

4 Likes

That’s lowkey terrifying, you have a point there.

I no longer recognize the wikiHow I once loved.

I remember my first time I came across this site. Way back when, half a decade ago, my hands writing up an article I thought would never be published. Writing as a passion project, a what if, a maybe that there will be a place where a snippet of my knowledge – anyone’s – can be shared.

I remember the joy of what it felt like to see my doubts go unfounded, to see my article go live on this site. I remember what it was like to fall in love with this community, a group of people who dedicated their time together toward a shared pursuit, engaged in a united mission: to empower every person on the planet to learn how to do anything.

But remembering is all that’s left. Memory is the only place I can find and feel the wikiHow I once loved, no matter how hard I try each day to seek it once more.

Because, similar to the concerns my fellow editors have raised, I have felt a wave of disillusionment wash away the motivation for me to continue on wikiHow, regardless of how hard I try to grope for reasons. They are concerns that have been sitting in my head continuously, silent but constant, for years in my mind. With each passing day, as I find them more difficult to reconcile with wikiHow’s mission, I find myself more distant from the site I once thought stood for something greater.

I apologize for the length of my message and for my tone if strident in reading. But I hope you will bear with me. I hope you will understand that I love wikiHow, that I speak not from hatred but from a sadness and disappointment with a project that I once had found purpose and mission.

But to me, the future of the “wiki” in wikiHow seems undeniably clear: slowly but steadily, the community that once built this project from the ground up will disappear, and wikiHow will become the content farm we all once dreamed unimaginable.

Yes, I know change is not just inevitable but necessary. I know the staff, from quizzes to entertainment articles to commercial experts, are doing what is necessary to stay afloat. I know they are doing what is needed to stay relevant in our new age. I know there are company concerns far outside what us few volunteers can neither consider nor comprehend. But it appears that in the process of staying relevant, we forgot about what it is we stood for.

Because wikiHow, and I dare not speak for anyone but myself, is now no longer a company in support of a community; it is a community in support of a company, one that deviates further from its mission each passing day.

My concerns first began with wikiHow Pro. I remember the day it was announced, as I sat there behind my computer, editing away on some article time has long removed from memory. But time never once made me lose sight that my editing – our editing – is for the betterment of someone else who needs it. So I felt rocks rain as I learned of the initial paywall. Where was the free and open website that was established upon our mission? How would those who wanted to learn the skills under paywall, but had not the surplus dollars to expend, learn on what was supposed to be a wiki for everyone?

On the forums that day, I read a message which Alex wrote – not me, but Alex known under Galactic Radiance – that encapsulated my concerns. He wrote, and I paraphrase loosely, how he feared wikiHow would morph into one of the many sites that started off open, but evolved into paywall-hidden or mission-devoid projects that are now relegated to the low-quality Internet. I casted his view aside then, but I fear now he may have been right. So much more of wikiHow is now focused on pure viewership-increasing motives. Articles of commercial products that would traditionally have been against guidelines are now promoted. Policies once hailed as gospel are now tossed out the window in the name of SEO or readership.

The homepage I have open right now, just as I am writing this, illustrates precisely what has happened. I’ll name just a few: “200 Adjectives to Describe a Person,” “What is the Rarest Zodiac Sign,” and so on. And today is a good day. As Iris put it, these articles are what I would expect to find on Buzzfeed or Yahoo. They are not what anyone would have expected to find on wikiHow just a few years ago. They are also not the articles of a project that each of us signed up to pour our time into.

For those who remember, I implore you to recall whether any of this would even have been thinkable just a few years ago. If this was our homepage then, what would we have said? What would we have done? I think the answer is as clear as it is painful. The article would have been deleted, and the explanation to the editor would have been ordinary then, but almost inconceivable now: because it doesn’t conform with our mission.

Perhaps this is all necessary. Perhaps these changes, in an age of technology that consumes all oxygen from sites that don’t change to what is the “meta” of the day, is necessary. And I don’t doubt for a single second that the staff do everything in their power for, out of good-faith commitments, to keep wikiHow relevant and afloat. That is, like our mission, equally necessary.

But it seems that the former task of keeping wikiHow afloat as a platform to serve high-quality content has superseded the importance of high-quality content altogether. For someone who has been here for over half a decade, it is truly heartbreaking. As I look for remaining reasons to continue contributing to this site, I find fewer and fewer within sight.

Remember: we are volunteers. We are people who write, edit, and contribute for this site because we believe in its mission. We are people who have devoted hundreds of hours of our time, for free, to a project devoted to helping others. We are not, however, mindless contributors for a company that puts profit over people this site was first meant to be for. It feels more like the latter now than ever before.

It seems increasingly so that I am but an unpaid employee in a community working for a staff that has long forgotten about us or why we first came. I once spent many hours a day volunteering because I felt like my work mattered; I now do so because a small part of me, a belief in this project instilled since the first edit I made, continues to maintain that I am not a stubborn stickler to a lost idea or gone community of exploited volunteers. But I am losing faith.

There is a quote on Eric’s user page (and please do not construe me to be speaking at all for him, for I understand we may all have very different viewpoints on this issue), a message left by one of thousands of editors who took a few seconds to leave their mark on this project.

It is a message that encapsulated why I continued to wish that either wikiHow – or perhaps my own view – would change to give me persisting reason to stay on this site. It goes like this:

“… I am very glad to be part of this moving train. It is a dynamic movement capable of changing millions of lives daily. It gives equal opportunities and potential for anyone to create tremendous impact in one way or the other, in the lives of those who are desperate and losing hope.”

I no longer know where we are on this moving train. As I look back at my countless hours spent on what I truly believed to be an incredible project, one in which I woke up early and eager each day to contribute, I am running out of reasons – despite how hard I continue in trying – to justify my love and dedication for this site.

Every bit of me wishes that I am wrong. But I fear that I am not.

8 Likes

I was going to hold back replying here, but after seeing thoughtful discussion on this matter, I thought I’d add my two cents.

To add on from what I said a few weeks ago:

For those who knew me during my work between 2020 - 2023, I occasionally checked the “New Pages” section to monitor new written articles (even though I didn’t have any booster rights). Back then (and as echoed by many), we had new users make new articles that were potentially helpful and contributed well to our mission. While I do re-echo my sentiment that the restrictions put in place are to reduce spam, I’ll admit that doing the task of seeing new articles has restricted me to categorize new WRM articles that are either still “How-to” related, wishes/quotes to say for one person, or just quizzes altogether.

That being said, I took time to imagine some wikiHow users who are here to contribute and want to make new articles the moment they start. However, just as WikiBoat said it:

With that mentioned, I’d be open to relaxing the policies, even if it does mean we’ll be back to seeing spam articles on the site (those articles can easily be deleted or tagged with an NFD tag, short and sweet just like before). If we get more incentives for new users to stay on the site, then I’m sure we’ll have more active contributors for sure. This would also help any university student who has to use wikiHow as an assignment, and restricting their ability to check rather than doing their assignment of making an article first isn’t going to help matters.

Of course, there’s the concern of how some of the WRM articles are going. We all know the mission of wikiHow is to make a reader learn how to do anything… and while I do appreciate some of the new articles that are leaning to contributing to the actual mission at hand (such as this one and this one, too ), the bulk of new articles, just as mentioned, are shying away from the mission. Take, for instance, this quiz/test I saw while casually checking in the New Articles recently.

Now, I’m open to wikiHow continuing to create quizzes and tests (which keeps reader engagement), but seeing that sort of test quite shocked me. This would fall in the {{nfd|sex}} category. I know wikiHow has put true restrictions on what’s a good topic for a quiz/test, but if an innocent person bumps into this article by accident, I’m sure it would not be pretty. To add on one similar sentiment:

That being said (and just like almost everyone in this thread), WRM has been posting a lot of advertising articles recently. Currently, the main page includes a Sling TV advert, and I’m a bit worried that it would turn into an advert farm if this is not controlled. I also agree with these sentiments (since they already mention my point):

All in all, wikiHow needs to give new volunteers a chance to contribute more than just being redirected to the Topic Greenhouse/Community Dashboard. Progress is inevitable and while some of it is great (the new quizzes that are appropriate and the alternate forums separate from this one), I’m sure this discussion will help make sure wikiHow continues to be volunteer-friendly rather than just restricting new users.

8 Likes

Absolutely. When I joined, I was able to go through Patrol Coach and jump right in from there. It’s sad to see how much effort we’re asking on new users just to make the base of an article. I’m not going to say that it’s wrong to require autoconfirm, but I at least would remove the days required OR lower the edits needed. Would it allow for more spam? Yes. However, it would allow us to make more high-quality articles in the same timeframe.

6 Likes