Piotr Konieczny wrote:
Matthew Flaschen wrote:
I'm not at all clear how you arrived at the
figure "8 millions vandal
sockpuppet accounts", nor what you mean by it. However, it doesn't
follow from the figures you've cited. Rather, I believe most of the 8.5
million user accounts are simply inactive. Someone made an edit,
constructive or not, then left, and did not return with that account (at
least not yet).
For me, such editors are part of our community of volunteers.
Okay, that's your definition of "community of volunteers". Lots of
people have their own definiton of volunteer and/or active user (as was
recently discussed here). But clearly what the stat means is that there
are/were 150,000 active users (for some value of active), which
it is calling a community of volunteers. It is not trying to denigrate
those who contribute rarely; it's just making a different point.
Of course, we may dispute whether all volunteers are a
community; but the main point here is whether the current official
Wikimedia Foundation number of "a global community of more than 150,000
volunteers" isn't a serious under estimation?
Again, no, once you understand the meaning of the phrase.
Do we know the global edit redistribution per users?
I.e. how many users
made 0 edits, how many made 1, how many made 10,000... a graph would be
This can be calculated from the dumps. I haven't seen any with that
level of granularity.