写作与思考2020aaronsw.com
谁在写维基百科？
Who Writes Wikipedia? (2006)
导读
Aaron Swartz 在 2006 年通过分析维基百科的编辑历史，发现维基百科并非由少数核心编辑写成，而是由大量偶尔贡献者共同完成。这篇文章值得写作者读，因为它揭示了一个反直觉的协作写作真相：广泛而零散的贡献如何汇聚成庞大内容，以及社区规则如何影响人们是否愿意动笔。
可以直接用的写作要点
- 01
大量普通、零散的贡献汇聚起来，同样能写出大作品，不必迷信“少数精英写作者”的神话。
- 02
想让更多人参与写作，就要降低门槛、让偶尔的贡献获得回报，而不是只压榨核心作者。
- 03
写作社区如果对新内容“有罪推定”、规则繁琐，会让贡献者疲惫退出，需要更友好的反馈机制。
- 04
文章的结论有时效性，可以用最新数据复现分析，检验观点是否仍然成立。
HN 评论精选
维基百科应降低偶发贡献的门槛，但社区规则实际上在惩罚新贡献者。
Wales 有一点说对了：这个事实有巨大的政策含义。如果维基百科是由偶尔贡献者写成的，那么要让它成长，就需要让偶尔贡献变得更容易、更有回报，而不是从那些终身投入的人身上榨取更多工作。问题是维基百科社区恰恰反其道而行：新内容常被“有罪推定”，贡献者得自己摸清古怪的规则，向管理员证明自己的编辑不该被回退或删除。
quanticle查看英文原文
Wales is right about one thing, though. This fact does have enormous policy implications. If Wikipedia is written by occasional contributors, then growing it requires making it easier and more rewarding to contribute occasionally. Instead of trying to squeeze more work out of those who spend their life on Wikipedia, we need to broaden the base of those who contribute just a little bit. The problem is that, as a community, Wikipedia has gone out of its way to do the opposite of that. New content is often treated as "guilty until proven innocent", and it's up to the contributor to wade through Wikipedia's idiosyncratic rules and definitions in order to justify to the moderators why their edits should not be reverted or their articles deleted.
社区排外和小圈子把守会让贡献者放弃，专家内容也可能被改写。
我试着为希伯来语版本做贡献，专注于扩展现有条目，结果遭到强烈反对，连添加一些有助于平衡明显偏见的链接都不行，我最后放弃了。大学里大家被警告不要用维基百科，它不能作为参考，还有很多例子说明专家贡献的内容被改写，最后只剩下管理员和小圈子改过的版本。克罗地亚语版本甚至被新纳粹接管，教育部都发了警告。
onyva查看英文原文
From my experience with trying to contribute to the Hebrew version, try contributing focusing on expanding an existing article and watch what happens. In my case there was a very strong push back even against adding links that expand on issues mentioned which imho helped to balance an obvious slant. I gave up after a while. At university of course you’re warned not to use Wikipedia, it’s not acceptable as a reference and many examples are presented of experts in their field who contributed articles, which were then rewritten to the point where there was nothing left, other than the revised version of the moderators and the small mafia that runs the Israeli Wikipedia. There’s also the examples of the Croatian version which was taken over by neonazis and even the ministry of education had to publish a warning.
文章结论有时效性，需要复现分析检验。
现在重新做这个分析会很有意思。2006 年是很久以前了，当时维基百科在快速增长，很多主题还没有好的覆盖。到 2020 年，我已经想不起主流主题在英文维基百科上没有大量覆盖的时候。低垂的果实已经摘完了，大众还写维基百科的大部分吗？
bawolff查看英文原文
It would be interesting to redo this analysis now. 2006 was a long time ago. In 2006 wikipedia was in a very rapid growth phase; lots of topics still didn't have good coverage yet. In 2020, I can't remember a recent time where a mainstream topic didn't have extensive coverage on en wikipedia. Do the masses still write most of Wikipedia now that the low hanging fruit has been written?
文章核心是维基百科由大量人写成，“少数人贡献”是流行神话，可复现验证。
这个帖子的评论似乎都和文章内容无关（标题很诱人，但文章本身很酷），所以来一条直接相关的：正如文章所说，维基百科是由大量人写成的。“只有少数人贡献”是神话。查看编辑历史就能证明，也可以复现他的分析。随着时间推移，这个神话越来越相关，虽然传播神话的人变了，动机也变了。最流行、最持久的神话之一！
kick查看英文原文
None of the comments in this submission's thread so far seem to be related to the article's content (the headline was tantalizing, but the article itself is really cool), so to try and counteract that, here's one that's directly related: As it says, Wikipedia is written by vast amounts of people. The myth that only a small number of people contribute is just that: a myth. Checking edit histories on anything but the most niche of articles would demonstrate this, but you could also do the same analysis he did today and see if you can replicate his result; it's been a few years now, things probably look slightly different. This has gotten more relevant over time even though the people perpetuating the myth have changed, along with their motives for doing so. One of the more popular and long-lasting myths!
同类还值得读
不要想好再写，要写来思考
Don’t think to write, write to think
这篇短文主张不要把写作当成思考完成后的记录，而要把写作本身当作思考的工具：动笔的过程会逼出想不清楚的地方。
写作与思考2022 · 553 分 · 145 评4 条写作要点编辑精选写作即思考：学会自信地写作
Writing Is Thinking: Learning to Write with Confidence
这是一篇讲“写作即思考”的博客：作者认为写作不是把想好的东西誊写出来，而是借助写作本身把想法想清楚，因此写作者应当建立信心、敢于先写烂稿。
写作与思考2019 · 529 分 · 83 评4 条写作要点编辑精选如何用写作来思考
How to think in writing
这篇文章讨论的是「用写作来思考」：作者认为写作不只是把想清楚的东西表达出来，更是想清楚本身的工具——文字落在纸上，你才有机会看见自己思路里的跳跃、含混和漏洞。
写作与思考2024 · 424 分 · 120 评4 条写作要点编辑精选写作，帮你逃离默认的人生设置
Write to Escape Your Default Setting
文章的核心主张就写在标题里：写作是帮你逃离「默认设置」的手段——日常的思维和表达都有惯性默认的默认模式，而落笔能逼你跳出来，重新看清自己到底在想什么、要说什么。
写作与思考2025 · 407 分 · 93 评4 条写作要点编辑精选写作就是思考
Writing is thinking
文章以“写作即思考”为题，讨论写作不只是把已有想法记录下来，而是帮助澄清、组织和推进思考的过程。
写作与思考2025 · 330 分 · 128 评4 条写作要点编辑精选