You have a very similar effect in larger Wikipedias. In those ones, there is no very active, "single bus"-like contributor, but a core of very active users concentrating about 85% of the total number of edits per month.
It seems that in these languages, though, there is a generational relay in which new active users jump into the core to substitute those who eventually give up, for any reason. So, the concentration becomes stable after a couple of years (aprox.) and the encyclopedia is able to continue growing. Best. F. --- El jue, 23/10/08, Gerard Meijssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió: > De: Gerard Meijssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Asunto: Re: [Wiki-research-l] "Regular contributor" > Para: "Research into Wikimedia content and communities" > <[email protected]> > Fecha: jueves, 23 octubre, 2008 10:27 > Hoi, > I missed that this was the research mailing list.. my > fault. Consequently my > answer was not appropriate. With this in mind, it is > interesting to learn > how the spread is in particularly the smaller projects. In > my opinion there > must be a certain amount of productive people in order to > get to a community > that does not have one person who is the "bus > factor". > > Having someone who drives the bus is really important. I > wonder how you can > point this person out. I think that someone who is just > editing is important > but it is not all that builds a community. > Thanks, > GerardM > > On the Volapuk wikipedia Smeira was really important. When > he left, I > understand that activity collapsed. > > 2008/10/22 phoebe ayers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > 2008/10/21 Gerard Meijssen > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >> Hoi, > >> When you divide people up in groups, when you > single out the ones "most > >> valuable", you in effect divide the > community. Whatever you base your > >> metrics on, there will be sound arguments to deny > the point of view. When it > >> is about the number of edits, it is clear to the > pure encyclopedistas that > >> most of the policy wonks have not supported what > is the "real" aim of the > >> project. > >> > >> When you label groups of people, you divide them > and it is exactly the > >> egalitarian aspect that makes the community > thrive. > > > > > > But this isn't about labeling people for the rest > of time and saying that > > this is how they are defined *on Wikipedia* -- > it's about saying how do you > > study people who regularly contribute to Wikipedia, > and as a part of that > > how do you define the group that you are studying, > which is an important > > question for any research study. > > > > Given that it's impossible to study every > contributor to the project in > > every study, and since many researchers are interested > in why people who > > spend a lot of time or effort working on Wikipedia do > so (and what exactly > > it is they do), this is a very relevant question for > this list. > > > > --phoebe > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wiki-research-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki-research-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
