Has Wikipedia Peaked? 484
An anonymous reader writes "After more than a year with no official statistics, an independent analysis reported Wednesday showed that activity in Wikipedia's community has been declining over the last six months. Editing is down 20% and new account creation is down 30%. After six years of rapid growth and more than 2 million articles, is Wikipedia's development now past its peak? Are Wikipedians simply running out of things to write about, or is the community collapsing under the weight of external vandalism and internal conflicts? A new collection of charts and graphs help to tell the tale."
So... (Score:5, Funny)
Or should we look it up in Wikipedia?
No (Score:5, Funny)
Hmmm (Score:1, Funny)
Re:There's nothing left that wikki doesn't know! (Score:5, Funny)
Request VfD on parent (Score:5, Funny)
Re:There's nothing left that wikki doesn't know! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Natural? (Score:5, Funny)
I second that. As a "hobbiest-contributor" myself I have written or expanded around 10 specialist articles. There is not a lot more specialist knowledge I feel that I have to contribute to Wikipedia - hence I've not added anything in the last 6 months or so.
Re:My rant on the downfall of Wikipedia (Score:5, Funny)
Re:There's nothing left that wikki doesn't know! (Score:1, Funny)
1.Atlantis ----> Stone Age ---> Bronze Age --> Babylon ---> Golden Age
2.Greece --> Stone Age --> Barbarianism --> Bronze Age --> Golden Age
3.Rome --> Stone Age --> Midevil period --> Bronze Age --> Industrial Revolution
4.America --> Clinton Adm. Internet --> Bush Adm. War (Wiki started) --> Stone Age --> oh dear