|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.|
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)
- Exactly, I keep reading statistics about Wikipedia's editors like nationality, gender, education but I keep wondering where they get this data, most editors I encounter are from India, and most Indians tend to have a rotating IP address so they will tend to be fictionally overrepresented, in fact the same goes for Vietnam, I don't get where they get these statistics from. --Hoang the Hoangest (talk) 02:23, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
How many eligible to vote here?
There is a statement "About 300,000 editors have edited Wikipedia more than 10 times.". We need a citation for that. We also need to list another important statistic: how many editors qualify to vote, or at least an example for some particular election, e.g. for Wikipedia Steward. According to , that currently requires 600 edits, 50 of which are recent. ★NealMcB★ (talk) 21:32, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
- I ran a query and found 12,043 users who matched the criteria. Regretfully, I couldn't get the query to run in 10 minutes on quarry, so I used the analytics servers to do it. You can download the dataset here: http://datasets.wikimedia.org/public-datasets/enwiki/etc/enwiki.eligible_user.tsv
- Here's the query for the curious.
SELECT user_id, user_name, COUNT(rev_id) AS recent_revisions FROM revision INNER JOIN user ON user_id = rev_user WHERE user_editcount >= 600 AND user_id NOT IN (SELECT ug_user FROM user_groups WHERE ug_group = 'bot') AND rev_timestamp > "20140811" GROUP BY user_id HAVING recent_revisions >= 50;
- --talk • contribs) 01:14, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you! Note that (at least based on the dataset name), this is only for editors who qualify based on their edits on the English Wikipedia. I think that several times than many editors qualify to vote in the steward elections based on edits on other Wikipedias.
- Also, note that you can do a query on quarry which shows how many editors have 600 edits or more on en.wikipedia, excluding bots, thanks to this code from PiRSquared17, which you can run as seen at http://quarry.wmflabs.org/query/1942. That shows that 53260 editors from the English wikipedia met the first hurdle of 600 overall edits. So about a quarter of those who met the first hurdle also met the second hurdle of 50 recent edits, I guess:
USE enwiki_p; SELECT COUNT(*) FROM user WHERE user_editcount > 600 AND user_id NOT IN /* Exclude local bots. */ (SELECT ug_user FROM user_groups WHERE ug_group="bot") AND user_name NOT IN (SELECT gu_name FROM centralauth_p.globaluser JOIN centralauth_p.localuser ON lu_name=gu_name AND lu_wiki="enwiki" JOIN centralauth_p.global_user_groups ON gug_user=gu_id WHERE gug_group="global-bot");
- ★NealMcB★ (talk) 14:10, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
- See some proposed research on the topic at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research_talk:Counting_Wikipedians ★NealMcB★ (talk) 00:15, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
- ★NealMcB★ (talk) 14:10, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
Brazilian Portuguese option
We need translate "pt" to "pt-br". It's different languages. I was blocked trying to have an better Wikipedia.org