The Signpost

Recent research

Various metrics of quality and trust; leadership; nerd stereotypes

Contribute  —  
Share this
By Tilman Bayer
+ Add a comment

Discuss this story

These comments are automatically transcluded from this article's talk page. To follow comments, add the page to your watchlist. If your comment has not appeared here, you can try purging the cache.

'"regular folks" ... a "well educated, credentialed group", and thirdly, "solitary techno-geek... technologically adept, unkempt, unhealthily obsessive, and absorbed with online life." I'm not convinced the 'stereotyped' split is so far off the mark. Perhaps the third group is smaller than people think, but as a reasonably experienced contributor, I'd say these were the three biggest groups - from first to third, smaller, but more inclined to edit (see also WP:BIAS). Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 08:59, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WikiSym Research

Hello everyone! If you are curious about current (or older) Wikipedia research as published through WikiSym, you can look up all the papers in the respective proceedings. Here is a list of the WikiSym proceedings web pages:

Best, Dirk Riehle (talk) 21:31, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nerd stereotypes

I can understand that making it uncool to edit wikipedia would deter non geeks from editing. But was it ever cool and trendy to edit Wikipedia and did we ever have much reach beyond the techno/nerd community? Hundreds of millions of people edit Facebook, hundreds of thousands edit Wikipedia, yet we aren't that different in terms of numbers of visitors. Unless someone can think of an event or meme in the last few years that would have made editing Wikipedia become less fashionable then I'm inclined to suspect that we always had a geeky tendency. ϢereSpielChequers 21:42, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]


The Signpost · written by many · served by Sinepost V0.9 · 🄯 CC-BY-SA 4.0