Decline Theories (And Support)
 Share
The version of the browser you are using is no longer supported. Please upgrade to a supported browser.Dismiss

View only
 
 
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
1
Decline TheoriesRelevant To Which Stage of the Editor Life-cycleFormer Editors SurveyUNU-Merit SurveyEditor Trends Studyserver log dataUsability Studies Mobile user experience researchEditor Survey 2011Expert Barriers SurveyNewbie Treatment at CSD StudyStory of the Russian WikipediaAny relevant external studiesComments made online in response to the NY Times gender gap storyAnecdotal stories from WikimediansIf true, argues forRASCI
2
English onlyAll languages and projectsMainly EnglishAll languages and projectsEnglish WikipediaGlobal Quant & India/Brazil/US Not yet in fieldAll lang Wikipedias. Not yet in the fieldEnglish only. Results not finalized.English WikipediaRussian WikipediaOtherEnglish WikipediaAll projects all languages, but mostly English
3
4
The Wikipedia interface and the requirement to learn wiki syntax are a huge problem: it's old school technology, and it is deterring prospective editors who are used to easy online interaction on sites like Flickr and Facebook and Twitter.E0, E1-99, E100-999Visual editorWMF responsible, community supports
5
The interface has actually gotten less user-friendly for experienced editors too: increased mark-up complexity is deterring experienced editors.E100-999, E1000+Visual editorWMF responsible, community supports
6
The Gold Rush Theory: the basics have been written, and it may be natural that a 'mature' encyclopedia needs fewer editors than a young, highly-incomplete one.AllNo action
7
Everybody who wants to edit Wikipedia is already doing it.E0, E1-99No action
8
There is lots of stuff to do online today, and activities like Facebook and Twitter are cutting into time that would otherwise have gone towards editing WikipediaAllUnclear
9
There was some precipitating external event that caused a drop-off in new editors e.g., Seigenthaler scandal dissuades people from editing, or a global famine, war, poor economy distracts everyoneAllUnclear
10
Site slowness means actions take a long time to perform, making editing frustratingE1-99, E100-999Better site performanceWMF responsible
11
Trolls and bullies have created sufficient toxicity to drive away experienced editorsE100-999, E1000+Better troll managementCommunity responsible, WMF supports
12
Crowding: As the size of a group increases, conflict will also increaseAll except E-1, E0No action (will self-correct as group shrinks)
13
Eternal September in general: Wikipedia editors feel overwhelmed by clueless newbies, so they have erected lots of barricades to manage their input, that have the effect of deterring newbies[see below][see below]
14
Eternal September, Barrier #1: Too many policies and practices, too high an editorial learning curve (not technical challenges but editorial) are deterring new editors from successfully joiningE0, E1-99Simplification of policies and practicesCommunity responsible, WMF supports
15
Eternal September, Barrier #2: Too much hostility. Rude, stubborn editing community is deterring both newbies and experienced editorsE1-99, E100-999, E1000+Unclear
16
Eternal September, Barrier #3: New editors are too frequently reverted/deleted, which scares them away.E1-99Article rescue squads, newbie coachingCommunity responsible, WMF supports
17
Eternal September, Barrier #4: Too little warmth. Not enough love and affirmation to encourage people to stick aroundAll except E-1 and E0, possibly espy E1-99Praise squads, Praise Twinkle, Ryan Kaldari's WikiLove widgetCommunity responsible, WMF supports
18
Eternal September, Barrier #5: Scary warning templates scare off newbiesE1-99Rewrite templates to be less scaryCommunity responsible, WMF supports
19
Eternal September Barrier #6: policy proliferation (too many rules) makes it less fun, so people stop editing E1-99, E100-999, E1000+Simplification of policies and practicesCommunity responsible, WMF supports
20
Other sites have individual or social awareness mechanisms regularly calling you back (e.g., e-mails, text messages, custom RSS notifications): Wikipedia doesn't, which makes it easy for people to drift awayAll except E0Institute callback mechanismsWMF responsible
21
Other sites have mechanisms for automatically thanking and praising people: Wikipedia's automated messages are curt and there are very few that just thank and praise.All except E-1 and E0, possibly espy E1-99Institute automated thanking and praising mechanismsWMF responsible; community supports
22
23
24
This is strong evidence in favour of this hypothesis
25
This is weak evidence in favour of this hypothesis
26
This is no evidence, or the evidence is not useful
27
This is weak evidence against this hypothesis
28
This is strong evidence against this hypothesis
29
This study is currently in the field: we don't yet have results.
30
31
Lifecycle: Editor -1, Editor 0, Editor 1-99, Editor 100-999, Editor 1000+
32
Editor -1=has taken no participatory action
33
Editor 0=has taken some participatory action but not edited, e.g. created an account, rated an article
34
Editor >1=has made a certain number of edits
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
Loading...
Main menu