'"regular folks" ... a "well educated, credentialed group", and thirdly, "solitary techno-geek... technologically adept, unkempt, unhealthily obsessive, and absorbed with online life." I'm not convinced the 'stereotyped' split is so far off the mark. Perhaps the third group is smaller than people think, but as a reasonably experienced contributor, I'd say these were the three biggest groups - from first to third, smaller, but more inclined to edit (see also WP:BIAS). Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 08:59, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Graph at the top of this page: why such different trends for conference and journal papers, with the first having peaked four years and on a trajectory to zero, and journal papers still peaking? I can't find the answer easily at the links.

  The article Measuring Hyperlink Distances: Figure 1a average 23.9, standard deviation 702.1?? Tony (talk) 09:53, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• The graphs of conference and journal articles makes sense. Conferences, by and large, are for observations and research that are new, so conference articles peaked when Wikipedia was a fairly new phenomena. Now that it has more or less stabilized, the conference article have tailed off. LouScheffer (talk) 15:33, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• This is just awsomme!! Thank you for writing it. --U5K0 (talk) 17:03, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Way too kempt to be "my kind of people". I may have to rethink this gig. Danger (talk) 03:38, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Graph: I think that the conferences may simply be not up to date. I've been updating the page till 2008; then stopped. Recently another person has updated the journals, but I am not sure if they updated the conferences. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:09, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello everyone! If you are curious about current (or older) Wikipedia research as published through WikiSym, you can look up all the papers in the respective proceedings. Here is a list of the WikiSym proceedings web pages:

• 2010: http://www.wikisym.org/ws2010/Proceedings
• 2009: http://www.wikisym.org/ws2009/Proceedings
• 2008: http://wikisym.org/ws2008/proceedings/
• 2007: http://www.wikisym.org/ws2007/proceedings.html
• 2006: http://www.wikisym.org/ws2006/proceedings/
• 2005: http://www.wikisym.org/ws2005/proceedings

Best, Dirk Riehle (talk) 21:31, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can understand that making it uncool to edit wikipedia would deter non geeks from editing. But was it ever cool and trendy to edit Wikipedia and did we ever have much reach beyond the techno/nerd community? Hundreds of millions of people edit Facebook, hundreds of thousands edit Wikipedia, yet we aren't that different in terms of numbers of visitors. Unless someone can think of an event or meme in the last few years that would have made editing Wikipedia become less fashionable then I'm inclined to suspect that we always had a geeky tendency. ϢereSpielChequers 21:42, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]