People who edit Wikipedia, either anonymously or using an account, presumably get some short-term and long-term benefits out of doing so (otherwise they wouldn't do it).
Possible personal benefits to a more accurate encyclopedia are:
- The feeling of accomplishment when one corrects an error or creates an article.
- If most people write about what they hate or love the most, then focusing on something one loves could be enjoyable.
- If one helps a global encyclopedia to be more accurate, more complete, or somehow better, then one lives in a world with a better encyclopedia, which could have long-term benefits.
- Regular data dumps ensure that users' work does not get lost, and remains accessible in the unlikely case of a lengthy outage. This provides users with the certainty that their work to enrich readers with knowledge will not be wasted. Most sites do not provide data dumps and few do not even allow web archival (e.g. Quora), which makes Wikimedia projects outstanding in this regard.
Wikipedia should work to give editors as many positive incentives as possible while attempting to limit negative consequences, such as trying to ensure criticism of editors and their work are neither empty nor insulting.