Somehow I am not convinced that the game experience is a good match for Wikipedia. 

In games, you try to do all "in game", so that your attention is fully devoted to the game. 

To contribute effectively to Wikipedia, you need instead to do quite a bit of research outside of Wikipedia, and then write the contribution including the citations. 

These seem to be very different kinds of activities.  I am sure we could get people playing the games of "Nobody reverts as fast as I do" (or better, "the guy that reverts faster than his shadow", see if you know what I am citing), or "who puts the most links to other language pages", ... but I doubt we would be as successful with content creation.

Luca




On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:51 AM, Steven Walling <swalling@wikimedia.org> wrote:

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:47 AM, S Page <spage@wikimedia.org> wrote:
Can we change the Delete operation to "Move to user subpage of initial author"?  Delete is such an awful game over event, a big fat "Insert 200 quarters and bang your head on the screen to continue".

"Userfying" articles this way is sometimes used, and the English Wikipedia's "articles for creation" review system (AFC) moves pages in and out of the Wikipedia Talk namespace. Both of these strategies run in to trouble when used at scale.  

One idea to test in the future, which editors who work in AFC have been receptive to, is creation of a noindexed Draft namespace. This would probably help accomplish the goal you were suggesting, where articles that aren't harmful per se but which need work can simple be demoted to a draft status. 

_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l