Wikipedia:Incentives
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
 | This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
People who edit Wikipedia, users or anonymous, presumably get some short term and long term benefit or benefits out of editing Wikipedia (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 much 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.