David Richfield, 25/04/2013 21:57:
That's a good point: the activity of proofreading
is inherently less likely
to cause controversy than the activity of building a neutral, comprehensive
encyclopedia, so it's probably naturally likely to attract people who are
less inclined to argue, and the topics are also likely to be easier to
resolve. I never thought about it that way.
If you look carefully enough, every Wikimedia project has its own
"fauna" and peculiarities just like Wikisource. (The case for Wikisource
has been dissected multiple times in WMIT members mailing list and
that's why we have a nice summary. ;-) )
Nemo