Wikipedia Task Force: Reader Conversion

[netmouse]

I have been selected to participate in the Wikipedia task force to increase contributions from readers and under-represented groups. In other words, to convert wikipedia readers to editors.

I have posted a few of my pet theories as to why people are discouraged from or disinterested in editing wikipedia on my wikipedia strategic planning user page. I welcome discussion there or here about why you or people you know choose not to edit wikipedia.

Comments

[gary-farber.livejournal.com]

Because editing Wikipedia gives the appearance of being A Way Of Life, rather than Just A Goddamn Hobby.

[gary-farber.livejournal.com]

As a smaller matter, I don't understand the entire philosophy of looking for entries to delete. If an entry is totally wrong or useless, sure, delete it. If it's 100% pure vanity, sure, delete it.

But otherwise, what's the point in deleting entries that are about minor subjects? Is Wikipedia going to run out of room?

That a lot of time seems to be wasted on arguments about what constitutes "too minor" is a canary to me indicated that people waste too much time on pointless arguments. Which is what most of wikipedia involvement looks to consist of.

If it were just a matter of adding good information, relatively seamlessly and transparently, rather than giving the appearance of having to take a combination of grad course and fraternity initiation in order to understand the arcane rituals, and then devote hours per week to upkeep on one's pet articles, I could see spending a little time on Wikipedia.

Though my other big reason not to is avoidance of more timesuck. But the overall issue is that the timesuck seems vastly disproportional to any ultimate benefit.

Maybe my perception is completely out of whack with reality since it is, to be sure, second-hand.