Wikimedia NYC
Background
Challenge
400 pages across three separate websites. Each of these pages was a unique wiki, a website that allows collaborative editing by its users.
Audience(s)
New York City Metro Area residents interested in getting involved in the community around Wikipedia and Wikipedia editing.
Priorities
More attendance at their events
Welcoming new members
Growth of the organization
Why my skills were the solution
The Wikimedia NYC board manages a community of Wikipedia-enthusiasts in the most populated city in the United States. Board members never know which of their three sites to send people to if they want more information on the organization or their events. The board knows users will get lost and confused regardless of which site they land on.
Approach
Mapping the Current State
I conducted interviews with six of the board members to learn about the history of the sites, their goals related to the websites, and their understanding of the sites’ audiences. At the end of this stage, I shared an outline of what was learned, a visualization of their different audiences and which of the sites they use, and an inventory of all the content and page-views across the sites to measure current engagement.
Content Optimization
I collected audience input through a digital card sort that Wikimedia distributed through their social media accounts and community listserv. Through this, I was able to reach a variety of New Yorkers who expressed an interest in Wikipedia and had varied levels of experience with the Wikimedia NYC websites. I translated the patterns of organization that emerged from the card sort into distinct site maps that delineated where each content-type went, which resulted in reduced duplication and a clear intent for each site.
Putting Everything in Place
Based on both the internal stakeholder and audience input, I had a clear vision of exactly what content belonged on each site. To illustrate this, I combined the inputs into a document that outlined exactly what needed to happen to each existing page – what to move, remove, or leave-as-it-was. The board members were excited to be a part of the process and opted to manage the movement of all content between the sites.
Outcomes
Archive/removal of 64% of the pages reducing the amount of content that needed to be managed or updated.
Reorganization of remaining 159 pages in a way that ensured the site’s visitors could find what they were looking for quickly.
A clear and easy implementation plan that reduced internal discussions around what to do with the sites and could be acted on efficiently.
