On 04/09/06, maru dubshinki <marudubshinki(a)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