Comments on: 90% of Wikia readers are lurkers http://wikiangela.com/blog/participation-inequality/ Angela Beesley Mon, 04 Jan 2010 14:24:08 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Angela Beesley http://wikiangela.com/blog/participation-inequality/comment-page-1/#comment-4832 Angela Beesley Thu, 22 Feb 2007 13:03:28 +0000 http://wikiangela.com/blog/participation-inequality/#comment-4832 I agree with you about the term "lurkers". I was using that since I wanted to draw similarities with Nielsen’s report, but of course in a wiki, readers are valuable and I didn't mean to disparage them by saying they were lurkers. I agree with you about the term “lurkers”. I was using that since I wanted to draw similarities with Nielsen’s report, but of course in a wiki, readers are valuable and I didn’t mean to disparage them by saying they were lurkers.

]]> By: Spankart http://wikiangela.com/blog/participation-inequality/comment-page-1/#comment-4819 Spankart Thu, 22 Feb 2007 10:04:52 +0000 http://wikiangela.com/blog/participation-inequality/#comment-4819 I wouldn't use the term 'lurkers' to refer to people who are visiting a wiki and reading it without creating an account and becoming active contributors. I would simply call them 'readers' (as opposed to 'editors'). A 'lurker' is an unwanted person. A 'reader' is highly wanted - that's an important difference. I think my wiki's high percentage (99%) of not-logged-in users shows that we are doing a very good job of writing articles that interest many readers. It's our sign of success, not an indicator that we're doing a poor job. It depends on what you see as a wiki's main goals. True, "converting readers into editors" is also highly desirable, and every wiki encourages its visitors to contribute their knowledge. But we shouldn't look down on people who just come in and read our articles, because that's exactly what we are writing these articles for. We strive to create free content for the world, not only for our own small community. Wikis aren't forums, chatrooms or similar places where visitors are *expected* to either actively contribute or get out. Wikis *allow* anyone to contribute. The login and edit buttons are a feature, not an obligation. If visitors want to become actively involved, let's give them a warm welcome. If they prefer not to, we should still respect and be happy to have them - they are our audience, what more can an author wish for? I wouldn’t use the term ‘lurkers’ to refer to people who are visiting a wiki and reading it without creating an account and becoming active contributors. I would simply call them ‘readers’ (as opposed to ‘editors’).

A ‘lurker’ is an unwanted person. A ‘reader’ is highly wanted – that’s an important difference. I think my wiki’s high percentage (99%) of not-logged-in users shows that we are doing a very good job of writing articles that interest many readers. It’s our sign of success, not an indicator that we’re doing a poor job.

It depends on what you see as a wiki’s main goals.

True, “converting readers into editors” is also highly desirable, and every wiki encourages its visitors to contribute their knowledge. But we shouldn’t look down on people who just come in and read our articles, because that’s exactly what we are writing these articles for. We strive to create free content for the world, not only for our own small community.

Wikis aren’t forums, chatrooms or similar places where visitors are *expected* to either actively contribute or get out. Wikis *allow* anyone to contribute. The login and edit buttons are a feature, not an obligation. If visitors want to become actively involved, let’s give them a warm welcome. If they prefer not to, we should still respect and be happy to have them – they are our audience, what more can an author wish for?

]]> By: Wikimetrics » Participation in Wiki communities http://wikiangela.com/blog/participation-inequality/comment-page-1/#comment-3925 Wikimetrics » Participation in Wiki communities Sun, 11 Feb 2007 12:52:09 +0000 http://wikiangela.com/blog/participation-inequality/#comment-3925 [...] Angela publised some stats from November 2006 on page views of non-logged in users compared to anonymous users for wikis at Wikia. The sample size is rather small on some wikis but in general (how explained by the other Jakob) 90% of page views were from users who were not logged. In spite of this not very innovative information (it’s always a power law!) the differences are interesting: In some wikis 70% of page views were from logged in users, in others only 1%. [...] [...] Angela publised some stats from November 2006 on page views of non-logged in users compared to anonymous users for wikis at Wikia. The sample size is rather small on some wikis but in general (how explained by the other Jakob) 90% of page views were from users who were not logged. In spite of this not very innovative information (it’s always a power law!) the differences are interesting: In some wikis 70% of page views were from logged in users, in others only 1%. [...]

]]> By: Me http://wikiangela.com/blog/participation-inequality/comment-page-1/#comment-3308 Me Sat, 03 Feb 2007 21:32:36 +0000 http://wikiangela.com/blog/participation-inequality/#comment-3308 How do you keep from people posting garbage? How do you keep from people posting garbage?

]]> By: Lurker (Has always been by blog-post-name) http://wikiangela.com/blog/participation-inequality/comment-page-1/#comment-2990 Lurker (Has always been by blog-post-name) Tue, 30 Jan 2007 19:23:19 +0000 http://wikiangela.com/blog/participation-inequality/#comment-2990 Well, one of the best ways to not negatively impact participation is to have as few barriers to editing as is reasonable, EG. Don't require registration unless absolutely necessary. Having to register to post a message on a talk page (Prime vector for getting people involved) will alienate HUGE numbers of people. Don't over-protect pages; for unregistered uninvolveds, semiprotection is as bad as full protection. Etc, etc... Well, one of the best ways to not negatively impact participation is to have as few barriers to editing as is reasonable, EG. Don’t require registration unless absolutely necessary. Having to register to post a message on a talk page (Prime vector for getting people involved) will alienate HUGE numbers of people. Don’t over-protect pages; for unregistered uninvolveds, semiprotection is as bad as full protection. Etc, etc…

]]> By: I am Jack's username http://wikiangela.com/blog/participation-inequality/comment-page-1/#comment-2978 I am Jack's username Tue, 30 Jan 2007 15:14:26 +0000 http://wikiangela.com/blog/participation-inequality/#comment-2978 If any experiments are made to "reward[...] participants for contributing", it could be tested on both a popular and lurker wiki, but only with acceptance of the vast majority of editors. Messageboard-like ratings is probably a good 1st test. If any experiments are made to “reward[...] participants for contributing”, it could be tested on both a popular and lurker wiki, but only with acceptance of the vast majority of editors. Messageboard-like ratings is probably a good 1st test.

]]>