Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2014-02-12/WikiProject report

Discuss this story

I appreciate the interesting interview. However, the fact that such a major country's wikiproject is represented by only two editors is a prime example of how few editors we have.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:01, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I feel the same way. It is disheartening to see how few editors can find the time to contribute anything except endless discussions. XOttawahitech (talk) 14:59, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I look at it the other way. People are busy actually editing instead of wasting time on signpost reports. -DJSasso (talk) 15:47, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Djsasso: If you feel reading the Signpost is a waste of time then what are you doing here? Just curious. XOttawahitech (talk) 11:09, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say reading them was. I meant answering questions for the reports. It is a waste of time. -DJSasso (talk) 12:50, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Djsasso: Thanks for clarifying. You are saying that reading the Signpost wikiproject reports is interesting/worthwhile, but that participating as an interviewee is not. Did I get it right this time? XOttawahitech (talk) 16:00, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well I generally don't read it because I personally don't find it useful. I only came to this one because of something I saw posted somewhere about it. But some people do find it useful. I would guess that many more don't find it useful. And I would hypothesize that even less people find contributing to it a good use of time. I know when they did a project I edit heavily that most people in our project didn't take part because they thought it was a waste and unlikely to get people interested in a project they weren't already editing in. -DJSasso (talk) 17:28, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]