A large portion of new users never make edits after they register. See here the new user log. New users that have made edits will have the word "contribs" shown in blue; otherwise, it is shown in red. For many new users that have made edits... those edits turn out to be vandalism and the account, a vandalism-only account that is blocked.
How many of those new users you selected have made edits since registering? I think many of those you sampled will never edit, period. Not before, not after. To make the "study" meaningful, you need to select new users who have made edits (and not vandalism).
The problem is that long-time editors have to keep dealing with trolls and POV pushers that keep coming along. They try to use Wikipedia as a soapbox. I think it becomes tiresome and frustrating for longtime editors, to keep dealing those folks. Gradually the longtime editors scale back their contributions, or altogether "retire" from Wikipedia.
Yes, Wikipedia's coverage of Pokemon and such topics is largely complete. What still is lacking are many academic topics, some which are covered more superficially. Not just anybody has the ability to write these. Geographic diversity is another area lacking. There is still much more to say on Wikipedia about places in Africa and topics relevant to those places. Many of the articles we do have about Africa are stub articles or superficial in covering the topic. Look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janjaweed and all the red links (missing articles) in that article. Also, there are versions of Wikipedia in 100+ other languages. Most of those Wikipedia sites are vastly smaller in the number of articles, and still have plenty of low hanging fruit.
Slashdot Mirror
A large portion of new users never make edits after they register. See here the new user log. New users that have made edits will have the word "contribs" shown in blue; otherwise, it is shown in red. For many new users that have made edits... those edits turn out to be vandalism and the account, a vandalism-only account that is blocked.
How many of those new users you selected have made edits since registering? I think many of those you sampled will never edit, period. Not before, not after. To make the "study" meaningful, you need to select new users who have made edits (and not vandalism).
The problem is that long-time editors have to keep dealing with trolls and POV pushers that keep coming along. They try to use Wikipedia as a soapbox. I think it becomes tiresome and frustrating for longtime editors, to keep dealing those folks. Gradually the longtime editors scale back their contributions, or altogether "retire" from Wikipedia.
Yes, Wikipedia's coverage of Pokemon and such topics is largely complete. What still is lacking are many academic topics, some which are covered more superficially. Not just anybody has the ability to write these. Geographic diversity is another area lacking. There is still much more to say on Wikipedia about places in Africa and topics relevant to those places. Many of the articles we do have about Africa are stub articles or superficial in covering the topic. Look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janjaweed and all the red links (missing articles) in that article. Also, there are versions of Wikipedia in 100+ other languages. Most of those Wikipedia sites are vastly smaller in the number of articles, and still have plenty of low hanging fruit.
He's not just an admin, but Essjay is a bureaucrat, serves on arbcom, has checkuser permission, and was recommended to the reporter.