The number of people writing and amending content on the world’s most expansive knowledge experiment, Wikipedia, has been in gradual decline for six years. A recent study from the University of Minnesota suggests that new rules and algorithms for quality control implemented in 2007 may be partially responsible.
But Aaron Halfaker, one author of the study, disagrees. “I don’t think that hitting newcomers with an algorithmic hammer is the best way for a community to level off its size,” Halfaker tells Mashable. “I’d assert that newcomers not finding work to do is a much better driving force for reducing the editing population. Yet our results suggest that the algorithmic reverts are the stronger predictor of churn.”