pajz, 23/11/2014 18:07:
while, as I said, I have no particular interest in
defending WMDE and have
not even read their proposal, let me say that I would find that a
preposterous measure of success/failure. You can't just look at a time
series of the number of editors and say "good trend -> congrats, chapter" /
"bad trend -> oh, guess the chapter did a bad job". What tells you that if
a project is experiencing a 10% decline of its editor base from year 1 to
year 2 that it wouldn't have lost 20% without the chapter's activities?
Indeed; blaming WMDE for the number of editors in de.wiki is less
ridiculous than asking immediate disbanding of WMF for the editor decline.
Back to serious numbers:
https://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/SummaryDE.htm
If you check the graphs for active editors and desktop page views, the
two lines are curiously parallel. Coincidence? Yes, several of the
biggest Wikipedias are quickly rushing to their death in few years;
nobody is doing anything.
Cf.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:The_sudden_decline_of_Italian_Wiki…
Nemo