QUOTE(Somey @ Wed 25th November 2009, 3:10pm)
...at which point, the current somewhat-debatable trend towards a reduction in the number of active WP editors will probably become a stampede for the exits. That would be a good thing, of course, but the fact that the system is ungovernable (and therefore institutionally irresponsible) is one of its main attractions for most of the current community members.
Still, you have to wonder - if they did that, would the existing community slowly be replaced by people who understand the need for such things as editorial standards (beyond simplistic notions of "notability") and effective governance structures...? IMO probably not, but it would make the whole thing less objectionable.
If I can cut in…
I doubt there will be a wave of replacements. Web sites that spring a leak never truly regain their cred – think of AOL, Friendster and MySpace. The WSJ article was the worst publicity for WMF – the writing is on the wall for anyone who wants to read it.
If there is a wave of new editors, it will probably come from the high school and college kids who have come of age tapping into Wikipedia’s none-too-reliable articles. For the most part, the kids seem more amused by the antics and the drama generated across the “community,†and they will happily pick up the chaos torch and run wildly in new direction. We can probably expect to see many more of these young people – though the idea of having 10,000 Ironholds clones is enough to inspire homicide. Needless to say, this demographic will make a bad situation worse.
Responsible adults, however, will either stay away from Wikipedia or get out once they realize how things operate. Professional writers don’t need Wikipedia – no byline and no pay? Academics and business professionals don’t have time for the likes of Uncle G. or Ottava or Tanthalas39 – and why write for Wikipedia when you can get yourself noticed in, say, the Harvard Business Review or some sort of professional journal? And responsible adults with families, professions and real life interests won’t care about whether David Shankbone’s biography meets WP:BIO standards.
While Arbcom is not helping matters and is clearly souring many people today, I suspect that any future catastrophe will not be of their doing. Their focus is very narrow and they are only interested in bullying a tiny clique that seems to thrive on negative energy. Any genuine wreckage will probably be a Seigenthaler-type controversy that will continue to confirm WP’s nonexistent editorial standards and irresponsible structure. Arbcom will come in afterwards to flush the toilet, but knowing them they'll probably wind up flooding the lavatory.