On 9/4/06, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 04/09/06, maru dubshinki marudubshinki@gmail.com wrote:
"Who Writes Wikipedia?" (
http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/whowriteswikipedia )
"This fact does have enormous policy implications. If Wikipedia is written by occasional contributors, then growing it requires making it easier and more rewarding to contribute occasionally. Instead of trying to squeeze more work out of those who spend their life on Wikipedia, we need to broaden the base of those who contribute just a little bit. Unfortunately, precisely because such people are only occasional contributors, their opinions aren't heard by the current Wikipedia process. They don't get involved in policy debates, they don't go to meetups, and they don't hang out with Jimbo Wales. And so things that might help them get pushed on the backburner, assuming they're even proposed."
This means that if we want the content to grow and be *good*, we need to be more newbie-friendly.
This is also a BIG stick to use on Byzantine overengineered processes and policy. Excessive process is actively newbie-hostile.
Look at Debian, bogged down in process, to the point where Richard Stallman failed to make it in as a Debian maintainer for his own software because of excessive process. Look how it took Ubuntu to give it a much-needed rocket up the arse. Without Ubuntu, we'd still be waiting on Etch. Will it take someone doing a successful fork to decalcify Wikipedia policy?
Greg - you might want to ask Aaron for what he ran, in case you can run better numbers across the whole database more easily.
You can't expect a site the size of Wikipedia to run without a serious amount of policy. If we stop adding policies things like living person bios would have degenerated into flame wars with no way out. Newbies do face a steeper learning curve, but in the end it is best for Wikipedia and it is the project rather than the newbies we should care about. -
Mgm