Who are the Wikipedia editors and what motivates them?

[MathematicalPhysicist]

Mentors note: This discussion about wikipedia has been spun off from a technical discussion in the High Energy subforum.

...And there is a fairly well written Wikipedia article on the topic...

Who does write those Wikipedia articles? and do they get paid for writing those articles in Wiki?

 

[ohwilleke]

Who does write those Wikipedia articles? and do they get paid for writing those articles in Wiki?

I didn't write this particular one, but I've substantially contributed to maybe a hundred of them on diverse topics from angelology, to law, to children's literature, to historical linguistics, to physics, etc. And, no, nobody gets paid for writing those articles.

 

[mfb]

Who does write those Wikipedia articles?

All articles have a public version history, which you can find by clicking on the "history" link. This particular article has 54 versions, with most of the text coming from user SteffenCoe.

Everyone can edit Wikipedia.

and do they get paid for writing those articles in Wiki?

No.

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

I didn't write this particular one, but I've substantially contributed to maybe a hundred of them on diverse topics from angelology, to law, to children's literature, to historical linguistics, to physics, etc. And, no, nobody gets paid for writing those articles.

What are your incentives of writing those articles?
And you're doing it in your spare time, correct?

 

[Nugatory]

What are your incentives of writing those articles?
And you're doing it in your spare time, correct?

It is the same incentive that we mentors have for moderating this forum... Contributing to a public good in one's spare time is a worthy endeavor.

 

[jack action]

and do they get paid for writing those articles in Wiki?

Technically no, but:

How many employees does Wikipedia have?

---

Mark Hetherington
Wikipedia administrator for over a decade
Answered 4 years ago · Upvoted by Todd Allen
Wikipedia editor since 2004, admin since 2007, arbitrator 2014-2016 term. · Author has 3.9K answers and 3.9M answer views

---

Wikipedia is a website, and has no employees. You're thinking of the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF), the non-profit that supports Wikipedia.

The WMF has about 290 employees, and will probably grow to about 300 in 2017–18.

These employees support Wikipedia indirectly. They don't create or edit content, because not doing so helps the WMF maintain its legal immunity as a “service provider” under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. In practice they'll occasionally edit to either communicate with the community (non-content edits) or carry out legal obligations (perhaps the very rare case of the community not proactively taking down copyright violations). Many staff also work on the project as volunteers, but take pains to indicate that their personal editing is not on behalf of the WMF.

Last I checked, about half the staff work on technical projects of one form or another, improving and/or updating the MediaWiki platform and its extensions.

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

Technically no, but:

How can a non-profit company have employees, they get paid don't they?
It's like the song of Rage against the machine goes: "he who controls the past controls the future". In this case "he who controls the knowledge resources controls humanity".

 

[Bandersnatch]

How can a non-profit company have employees, they get paid don't they?

The owners of the company do not make any profit off of its operations. The employees are getting paid, and the company may have revenues exceeding expenses. But no private person can pocket any such excess revenues. Non-profit doesn't mean 'operating on voluntary basis', 'not using any money', or some such thing.

 

[pinball1970]

I like wiki, first port of call for Science music and bios.

Refs and pdf links to the older papers and Scientific journals too.

As long as you expect it not to be 100%

 

[Nugatory]

How can a non-profit company have employees, they get paid don't they?

A non-profit is established under a charter that says that it will not make a profit. Thus money can come in from things like donations, the sale of goods, membership dues but it has to be spent on the activities of the non-profit: things like employee salaries, running a website, paying the taxes and rent on buildings or whatever.

Many examples: The non-profit Girls Scouts of America go door to door selling cookies every year to rause funds; the American Contract Bridge League charges fees to enter and compete in its tournaments, Goodwill Industries resells donated cast-off households goods; many condominium associations are organized as non-profit corporations supported by dues paid by the owners...

(This answer and my examples is specific to American corporate and tax law, but general principle is more widespread)

 

[Nugatory]

It's like the song of Rage against the machine goes: "he who controls the past controls the future".

Ahhhh... You do know the origin of that quote, do you not? It seems somewhat bizarre to compare the knowledge-control operations of wikipedia or other non-profits to the Soviet Union under Stalin...

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

Ahhhh... You do know the origin of that quote, do you not? It seems somewhat bizarre to compare the knowledge-control operations of wikipedia or other non-profits to the Soviet Union under Stalin...

I can always look on Wiki can't I?

 

[phinds]

Who does write those Wikipedia articles? and do they get paid for writing those articles in Wiki?

You seem to be puzzled by the concept of people volunteering their time / expertise to benefit the general knowledge base of mankind with no payback other than the satisfaction they get.

Some people like doing that.

I created and maintain / update an educational website about wood. I have easily spent in excess of 10,000 hours on it over 20 years and although I get the occasional donation for site support and a fairly trivial amount for Google ads, there was as I recall, only one year so far where my income exceeded my expenses. Most years what I spend on the site hosting plus books and wood samples FAR exceeds any income.

I just like sharing my knowledge of wood and I enjoy doing research on wood anatomy. I have helped a great many people identify pieces of wood that they could not otherwise identify and that pleases me. I also get a lot of praise from woodworkers around the world and that's my payment for all the effort.

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

You seem to be puzzled by the concept of people volunteering their time / expertise to benefit the general knowledge base of mankind with no payback other than the satisfaction they get.

Some people like doing that.

I created and maintain / update an educational website about wood. I have easily spent in excess of 10,000 hours on it over 20 years and although I get the occasional donation for site support and a fairly trivial amount for Google ads, there was as I recall, only one year so far where my income exceeded my expenses. Most years what I spend on the site hosting plus books and wood samples FAR exceeds any income.

I just like sharing my knowledge of wood and I enjoy doing research on wood anatomy. I have helped a great many people identify pieces of wood that they could not otherwise identify and that pleases me. I also get a lot of praise from woodworkers around the world and that's my payment for all the effort.

I do understand, I myself in my spare time read books in maths and physics if I find the time outside my work (lately I rarely find the time).

But I cannot find the time to write articles in Wiki, so I wondered how did those volunteers find the time?
Are they pensioners?

 

[Nugatory]

I can always look on Wiki can't I?

Yes, or any of hundreds of other sources. Did you? I’m still waiting for you to explain the parallels you see between the operation of Wikipedia and the Stalinist purges.

 

[DennisN]

Who does write those Wikipedia articles?

People like me. That is, common people.
(but I haven't done any writing or editing in a very long time.
And when I did, it was mostly on articles about history.)

and do they get paid for writing those articles in Wiki?

No. But we get to participate in edit wars.

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

Yes, or any of hundreds of other sources. Did you? I’m still waiting for you to explain the parallels you see between the operation of Wikipedia and the Stalinist purges.

I didn't know about the quote being addressed to Stalin's regime.
Why should I?
I am not a history freak, I am a maths-physics-engineering-logic and music freak.

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

People like me. That is, common people.
(but I haven't done any writing or editing in a very long time.
And when I did, it was mostly on articles about history.

No. But we get to participate in edit wars.

How is it decided which edit stays and which one doesn't?
Democracy or Dictatorship?

 

[DennisN]

How is it decided which edit stays and which one doesn't?

Persistence. The most stubborn and annoying person wins.

No, seriously:

Please note that, as I said, it was quite a long time ago I was active on Wikipedia.
As far as I remember, edit conflicts usually took this path:

1. Very simple conflicts could be solved by providing info in the edits themselves (as notes).
2. If that did not work, conflicts could be discussed on the talk page for the particular article.
3. And if that did not work, the people in conflict could ask other editors to give their opinion on the talk page.
4. And if that did not work, the conflict could be taken to "dispute resolution" (see e.g. Wikipedia:Dispute resolution requests).

A funny page I remember is this one: Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars.

Democracy or Dictatorship?

It's clearly not a dictatorship. Serious conflicts can get resolved by voting (if it's not resolved in other ways, as I described above).

 

[Fervent Freyja]

Who does write those Wikipedia articles? and do they get paid for writing those articles in Wiki?

My oldest nephew when he was 12 years old. Why? Probably because he has a peculiar passion for unique animals.

Looking at my TV's Youtube search history after my 10 year old nephew leaves my house, I figure he will soon figure out how to edit pages on Area 51, bigfoot, and UFOs.

When I think of Wikipedia, I cannot help but think of the many kids driving the editing war. They are stubborn and have the time. They pose as adults online frequently. Some of them are so smart that you cannot even tell they are kids.

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

My oldest nephew when he was 12 years old. Why? Probably because he has a peculiar passion for unique animals.

Looking at my TV's Youtube search history after my 10 year old nephew leaves my house, I figure he will soon figure out how to edit pages on Area 51, bigfoot, and UFOs.

When I think of Wikipedia, I cannot help but think of the many kids driving the editing war. They are stubborn and have the time. They pose as adults online frequently. Some of them are so smart that you cannot even tell they are kids.

I am waiting for the 12 years old child that will tell us what on Earth is M-theory...

 

[mfb]

But I cannot find the time to write articles in Wiki, so I wondered how did those volunteers find the time?
Are they pensioners?

All age groups.
You found the time to write thousands of posts here, many of them answering questions others had. It's not that different from writing Wikipedia articles.

Articles (longer than a few sentences) are rarely written in one step, the neutrinoless double beta decay is an outlier in that aspect. Usually articles are improved in many incremental steps by multiple different users. The history of "Lepton number" is a more typical process. The article was started in 2004, with just four sentences. Then someone expanded it two months later, and another month later it was expanded again, then tons of minor edits changed a word here and there, rephrased something, changed the formatting or made other smaller edits, and over the next 17 years the article has grown a lot and most of it was changed at least once.

Who has the time to fix a typo or improve a sentence in an article? Everyone.
In many cases that doesn't even need expertise in the specific topic.

How is it decided which edit stays and which one doesn't?
Democracy or Dictatorship?

Consensus, ideally.
For most edits the key principle is called BRD: Be Bold with the edit, Revert if it's bad, Discuss if needed. If you change an article and no one objects then that's the new version. If it is reverted to the older version keep that older version or start a discussion. Usually this discussion will find a version everyone is happy with.
If that doesn't work there are several ways to give the discussion to a broader audience, which usually leads to a version most people are happy with. In some extreme cases a good solution isn't possible, the default option is to keep the status quo. As an example, aluminium vs. aluminum will never have a solution everyone likes, the article is aluminium and it's unlikely to ever change unless that spelling falls out of use. Aluminum does get you to the same article, of course (it's a redirect).

 

[DaveC426913]

I've contributed to Wiki. Sometimes it's just fixing typos.

My big contribution was to the "Superhero Types" article. To which I added the missing "Slasher (eg. Wolverine, Blade)".

 

[ohwilleke]

What are your incentives of writing those articles?
And you're doing it in your spare time, correct?

An interesting creative outlet that has the potential to spread knowledge to lots and lots of people. I do this in my spare time.