[Wikimedia-l] Editor retention (was Re: "Big data" benefits and limitations (relevance: WMF editor engagement, fundraising, and HR practices))

[Andreas Kolbe]

On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 6:41 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemowiki at gmail.com>wrote:

> David Gerard, 09/01/2013 00:32:
>
>  On 8 January 2013 23:27, Kim Bruning<kim at bruning.xs4all.nl>  wrote:
>>
>>  I think that the requirements for a wiki (open, welcoming, anyone can
>>> edit,
>>> eventualism) are always going to be at tension vs the requirements for an
>>> encyclopedia (reliable, good sourcing, etc).
>>> Right now, en.wikipedia rules are more complex and potentially more
>>> strict than nupedia ever was, and we're running on inertia.
>>>
>>
>>
>> I understand the decline is similar in other wikis - that this is not
>> at all just an en:wp problem.
>>
>> How are the numbers for the other Wikipedias? How are the numbers for
>> the non-Wikipedias?
>>
>
> The main pattern, ie a turning point in 2007, is the same in all projects,
> and almost in all language versions of them:
> http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/**PlotsPngWikipediansEditsGt5.**htm<http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/PlotsPngWikipediansEditsGt5.htm>
> http://stats.wikimedia.org/**wiktionary/EN/**PlotsPngWikipediansEditsGt5.*
> *htm<http://stats.wikimedia.org/wiktionary/EN/PlotsPngWikipediansEditsGt5.htm>
> http://stats.wikimedia.org/**wikiquote/EN/**PlotsPngWikipediansEditsGt5.**
> htm<http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikiquote/EN/PlotsPngWikipediansEditsGt5.htm>
> http://stats.wikimedia.org/**wikisource/EN/**PlotsPngWikipediansEditsGt5.*
> *htm<http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikisource/EN/PlotsPngWikipediansEditsGt5.htm>
> (in order of project size/pageviews; graphs don't include recent data,
> https://bugzilla.wikimedia.**org/42318<https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/42318>)
> Typically the pattern is the same across all projects in the same
> language. (Almost?) all Russian projects, for instance, are an exception to
> decline.
> This has often made people wonder if the causes are external (Facebook?
> Facebook is also almost non-existing in Russia, right?).
>
> Nemo




Actually, Nemo, I don't think that is right at all. If you look at the
German, Spanish or French Wikipedia, for example, the German and Spanish
are totally stable, with no decline at all discernible around 2007, while
editor numbers for the French Wikipedia are actually growing:

http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaFR.htm
http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaDE.htm
http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaES.htm

Summaries and charts for all projects are available here:

http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/Sitemap.htm

These three projects are of a similar age to the English Wikipedia, and
they are definitely not following the same editor retention pattern at all.

I don't know the French and Spanish Wikipedias well, but the German
Wikipedia also generally seems more scholarly than the English one.

Andreas