> There isn't enough work anymore in a monopolized but declining market.

What's the relevance? Wikipedia contributors aren't employed by Wikipedia. Their work is volunteered, and nobody asks them to do it.

A lot of people do ask them not to do it.

▲

Wikipedianon 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> What's the relevance? Wikipedia contributors aren't employed by Wikipedia. Their work is volunteered, and nobody asks them to do it.

Yet, there's tons of people that love having control over articles and what people see. I was one of them.

It's exciting seeing news outlets quote your arguments in an onwiki dispute, or paraphrase an article that you wrote. Or having millions of people look at an article. It's much easier than starting a blog.

▲

thaumasiotes 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Ok, but what are you saying in "there isn't enough work anymore"? What is "work"? How much is there? Enough for what?

▲

Wikipedianon an hour ago | parent [-]

Most articles on notable AND interesting subjects have already been written and are of a high quality.

"notability" means there are peer-reviewed/editorially controlled articles on the topic.

So, if I wanted to write an article on Gas Town, I couldn't. It got a lot of technical blogs and Arxiv preprints written about it by experts, but it won't be notable.

	▲	20after4 17 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		This gets at one of the biggest flaws in Wikipedia, IMO. I think the notability standard is way too strict and gives way too much weight to main stream media sources as the blessed arbiters of what is notable.