Wikipedia losing editors, study says
Technology ( 4 )
The number of volunteer editors has declined from around 56,000 in 2007 to some 35,000 at the end of 2012
AFP
WASHINGTON —
Wikipedia, one of the world’s biggest websites, is losing many of its English-language editors, crippling its ability to keep pace with its mission as a source of knowledge online, a study says.
The study led by Aaron Halfaker of the University of Minnesota found that the number of “collaborators” or volunteer editors has been on the decline from around 56,000 in 2007 to some 35,000 at the end of 2012.
The researchers said there are a number of reasons, including the rise of automated programs or “bots,” but also noted that some potential contributors are being discouraged by Wikipedia’s structure.
“Several changes the Wikipedia community made to manage quality and consistency in the face of a massive growth in participation have ironically crippled the very growth they were designed to manage,” the researchers wrote in last week’s American Behavioral Scientist.
“Specifically, the restrictiveness of the encyclopedia’s primary quality control mechanism and the algorithmic tools used to reject contributions are implicated as key causes of decreased newcomer retention.”
They said that while Wikipedia has sought to root out less competent editors, its rules have also discouraged “desirable newcomers” who get discouraged when their contributions get deleted.
Wikipedia has editions in 285 languages. Its founder Jimmy Wales has cited the need to make Wikipedia more open to newcomers, to keep up with the vast amount of information it is trying to process.
But the authors of the study said Wikipedia is being crimped by its rules trying to improve quality.
“Wikipedia has changed from ‘the encyclopedia that anyone can edit’ to ‘the encyclopedia that anyone who understands the norms, socializes him or herself, dodges the impersonal wall of semi-automated rejection and still wants to voluntarily contribute his or her time and energy can edit,’” they wrote.
© 2013 AFP
Order by Time Order by Popularity
4 Comments
Login to comment
1
Speed
Spot on. I tried to update the current population of my city since it was five years outdated and it was erased. It discouraged me from doing any other edits.
-1
megosaa
nothing is ever the same.. mTV, youtube, airline service, price for gas, common courtesy.
0
basroil
SpeedJan. 07, 2013 - 08:12AM JST
Very true. Then add corporate interference in certain subjects (especially scientific ones) and existing editors that simply think they are infallible, and you have a recipe for a mass exodus of potential new (and knowledgeable) editors
0
praack
my issue was- what constituted an editor? though Wikipedia is good for casual use without a proper vetting procedure our company cannot use it for research.
if you are not in the field how can you be an editor- even if you are in the field- unless your credentials are easily accessible then how can we as an industry believe what is said? Oh wait- I forgot- it's on the internet - so it MUST be true!
so they have a bit to go before it becomes credible for work, for Gundam robots, for casual overclocking- if you are a noob ok , but not much else
Back to top