|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wikipedians page.|
|Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3|
|Threads older than 2 years may be archived by.|
"59% of the editors are aged 17 to 40, more specifically, 14% of the editors are in the group 18–21, 13% are 22–29, and 19% are 30–39. 28% editors are aged 40+, whereas 13% are aged 17 and under." Those percentages do not add up in any way. Andreas JN466 03:00, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
- I'll ping editors who added them. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:48, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
A Dozen Editors of the Week
The Editor of the Week sub-Project is proud to announce the twelfth recipient, User:Surtsicna. Would you like to nominate a fellow editor. Do you know of an editor that just works in the trenches and doesn't get the acknowlegemnet they are entitled to. Dont hesitate to Nominate. the nomination page|You will be happy that you did! ```Buster Seven Talk 07:18, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Ironic Statement is Ironic
"The significant and stable under-representation of women results in persistently unbalanced coverage (e.g. articles related to football are much more developed than articles related to motherhood) in Wikipedia." I'm a woman. At one point, I contributed to articles about Arsenal FC. I have a kid. I have never written on motherhood.
Wikipedians are volunteers
Wikipedians are volunteers - yet it never says that on the page. In fact, Wikipedians are the largest body of online volunteers, making this the largest example of Virtual volunteering - but there's no reference here on the page to that. I think there needs to be something on the page that says these people volunteer their time, or, explicitly, that they are volunteers, and I think there should be a see also section on the page that links to the related topics of Virtual volunteering, crowdsourcing and swarm intelligence, to show that this is part of a larger family of online volunteer action. There should also be a link somewhere on the page to Wikipedia:Wikipedian_of_the_year.
Are editors on equal standing regarding articles?
I have had the impression that WP is an egalitarian organization that values team-playing contributors (editors) equally, no matter the extent to which they want to or are able to contribute. This statement from the lede: "Wikipedians are people who write and edit the pages for Wikipedia, unlike readers who simply read the articles. Anyone can be a Wikipedian—including you." appears to me to support that view.
However, I've recently looked at an article that includes at Talk page where three gate-keeping editors (non-administrators, I think) repeatedly post dismissive comments directed at editors who propose changes. The statements include wording to the effect that only the opinions of regular editors to an article count and not those of editors that come in through the transom ("drive-by editors" as they call newcomers to an article). One gate-keeper even came right out and said to another editor that they don't have to pay any attention to the other's opinion.
So, what is true of Wikipedia - egalitarianism, some editors are winkingly more equal than others, or there's a site policy that some editors within an article have more weight than others? Thank you for your time, Wordreader (talk) 04:58, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
- I find it troubling that there is no reply posted to my query. The silence doesn't seem to bode well. Yours, Wordreader (talk) 23:14, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Draft edits to the lede
I'd like to make the following revision to the lede. Besides general copyediting, the main changes are (1) adding "editors" as a headword, (2) removing mentions of the full list of users and the random user link, which really aren't that useful, and (3) adding a new sentence on Wikipedians' tasks and beliefs.
Wikipedians or editors are the volunteers who write and edit Wikipedia's articles, unlike readers who simply read them. Anyone—including you—can become a Wikipedian by boldly making changes when they find something that can be improved. To learn more about how, you can check out the basic editing tutorial or the more detailed manual.
Wikipedians do a wide variety of tasks, from fixing typos and removing vandalism to resolving disputes and perfecting content, but unite in a desire to make human knowledge available to every person on the planet.
Source for nationality?
"Most editors (20%) reside in the United States, followed by Germany (12%) and Russia (7%). The only country not in Europe or North America in the top 10, is India (3%)." Is there a source for that? I'd love to see it! Also, this statement requires a date. And the section title should rather be "residence" than nationality I guess. Guaka (talk) 17:51, 22 November 2014 (UTC)