This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Editor Retention and anything related to its purposes and tasks.

Add new text under old text. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Start a new topic Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Shortcuts WT:WERWT:WER WT:RETENTIONWT:RETENTION

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36Auto-archiving period: 20 days

WikiProject Editor Retention was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 22 April 2013.

This WikiProject has been mentioned by a media organization: Tom Simonite (October 22, 2013). "The Decline of Wikipedia". MIT Technology Review. In July 2012, some editors started a page called WikiProject Editor Retention with the idea of creating a place to brainstorm ideas about helping newcomers and fostering a friendlier atmosphere. Today the most vibrant parts of that project's discussion page have gripes about "bullying done by administrators," debates over whether "Wikipedia has become a bloody madhouse," and disputes featuring accusations such as "You registered an account today just to have a go at me?"

One of our most obvious objectives in editor retention is to forward the idea of equality, regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, religion or creed. No one who discriminates may advertise here or be in any way a part of WER. Discrimination is completely against our entire mission, and will neither be endorsed nor tolerated.

This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Editor Retention This page is within the scope of WikiProject Editor Retention, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of efforts to improve editor retention on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Editor RetentionWikipedia:WikiProject Editor RetentionTemplate:WikiProject Editor RetentionEditor Retention

This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived.

This is a library of sorts. Open 24/7. No library card is required and no fines will be levied.

Back on July 1, 2012, Dennis Brown said: "I'm seeing a lot of discussion in a lot of places regarding editor retention, but not a coordinated effort. This is that coordinated effort, a way for us to actually do something beside speak out in random venues."

• Wikipedia:First contact
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 1#The decline is caused, at least in part, by increasing rejection of good-faith newcomer contributions
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 1#Core reasons for good editor dissatisfaction related to content: Unmet need for recognition, Frustration with seeing good work ruined, Exasperation at having to continuously defend completed work
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 1#Getting across to newbies quickly and clearly ...
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 28#What is editor retention?
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 29#A note from some guy
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 29#A suggestion for welcoming new editors
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 29#My experience as a new wiki editor
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 29#SPA Welcome #2--Expanding your Wikipedia experience (SMcCavandish)
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 30#The elephant in the room
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 30#Loss of core editors
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Archive 30#Newcomers and contests

I hadn't learned until now what "editor retention" is. Indeed, I've been too busy IRL with other things. I dunno who shares my interests in building Wikipedia IRL. Even I dunno any good stranger nearby interested in Wikipedia. Not to mention the project's slow decline and how potentially less welcoming the project may have been especially to those interested in Project Runway and Cheers and other newcomers.

Personally, I've been working on recently Project Runway, but then I realized that further collaboration may be needed, and I'm unsure whether many users have been aware of the "WP:collaboration first" essay. Indeed, a bunch of Project Runway-related pages may need a lot of improvements, but I've been working mostly on articles about its winners and runners-up. Unfortunately, Survivor and Big Brother have huger internet fanbase, while Project Runway.... well, not as huge as RuPaul's Drag Race... or probably The X-Files and sports-related stuff.

Until now, I've never realized that I may have encountered (symptoms of) editor retention and how this has affected areas of older television shows, not to mention more obscure ones and other topics that editors may have been barely interested in. Indeed, politics, sports, entertainment, and current events have been hot spots from what I can see. George Ho (talk) 09:45, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean you may have encountered symptoms of editing burnout? isaacl (talk) 05:53, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Dunno which symptoms I'm having, honestly. Whenever I see pages about older TV shows, like Cheers and Buffalo Bill (TV series), not having been tremendously improved, I feel as if I'm the only one trying to manage these areas. Same for less popular but still ongoing ones, like Project Runway. Or... maybe I feel like a loner in those neglected areas.

However, as much time I have spent improving those areas, I feel as if I'm the only one capable of improving those pages when no one else has done so, especially with me. I dunno anyone else as capable as me and interested in older television content, like The Mary Tyler Moore Show. George Ho (talk) 10:21, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've been also working on other topics outside television, like... the Second Cold War, whose topic has been challenged by those wanting to treat it as if it were an "event" despite otherwise and those wanting to challenge the US's superpower status. I'll declare which other topics if interested. George Ho (talk) 11:45, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I asked only because it's contradictory to say you've encountered "editor retention" while talking about an absence of editors interested in a given topic area. (There's either been a lack of retention, or no interested editors in the first place.) In my view, there has always been an issue of there being enough editors to update and maintain articles. Without enough editors to discuss any points of contention, there is no way to reach consensus to resolve disagreements (something I discussed under the "Tendentious editing" point in the "Reasons editors leave" section on the WikiProject Editor Retention page). WikiProjects are one way to try to gather sufficient interested editors across a broader area. Even then, and even assuming an active applicable WikiProject, there's no way to ensure that editors will get involved in any specific discussion. (I couldn't get anyone to ever weigh in over years on a content disagreement for a future baseball hall-of-famer, in spite of an active baseball WikiProject.) I hope that the mentor system will one day help guide newcomers towards collaboration in areas of interest, but at present I don't think it's doing much along these lines.

This isn't an effective place to find other interested editors for specific topic areas, so there's no need to list your interests in this thread. I suggest looking at the talk pages and history for related WikiProjects and articles. isaacl (talk) 16:26, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't an effective place to find other interested editors for specific topic areas, so there's no need to list your interests in this thread. I suggest looking at the talk pages and history for related WikiProjects and articles.

Okay, okay, I get your point. Still trying to learn the ropes of "editor retention". I come here not to just mention absence of interested editors and not to just beg others to help me.

Actually, I'm just close to being stressed out because I've been torn between contributing more and wanting to relax more IRL. If I choose to relax more, that could alleviate my stress level, but then pages would be potentially vandalized. If I choose to continue contributing more, then I would feel more anxious worrying about pages, but at least the quality level of pages I've contributed would remain consistent. Does this exemplify editor retention well? George Ho (talk) 18:45, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@George Ho you might want to look through some of the linked discussion archives above if you haven't already. I think in the past this project has often focused on retaining newcomers and not as often at the problem of retaining veteran editors. I know I'm currently seriously considering either leaving the project or taking a massive step back due to the inherent frustration in dealing with a user who clearly lacks competence in the area they've chosen to..."improve." Not the first time I've run into this, but there's a cumulative effect coming into play. Just wanted you to know you're not alone in your frustration. Sometimes this place feels like far more trouble than it's worth... Intothatdarkness 19:35, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your overview of your situation doesn't sound like a model example of editor retention (yet; maybe that will turn around). I agree with Intothatdarkness that others too feel conflicted between their desire to contribute and their desire to avoid contention on Wikipedia. I think most if not all editors would advise you to take care of yourself, because no one can do it for you, and you won't be effective as an editor anyway if you're not doing well.

For better or worse, participating in English Wikipedia means accepting the tradeoffs of a crowdsourced project that is currently using a decision-making process based on a consensus tradition. That means accepting that inevitably, every editor will eventually no longer be able to maintain articles, and that the community needs an ongoing influx of editors. The Eternal September effect is pervasive, though, across all online communities, and particularly ones with unmoderated discussion that are open to anyone. Establishing consensus requires strong alignment in goals, and it's just not possible in a large, self-selected community. Something is going to have to give way, but it's hard to predict in what direction that will occur. isaacl (talk) 02:03, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

George Ho, retention has many aspects to it. Do you enjoy outreach or guiding new users? The Wikipedia:Welcoming Committee is responsible for sending out the welcome messages that you have no doubt seen on the Talk pages of new users. We can always use more volunteers to reach out to new users and welcome them early in their wiki-career.

Additionally, one of the areas of interest to the Mediawiki Growth Team is new editor retention, and one of their projects is WP:Mentorship. If you enjoy things like helping out at the WP:Teahouse or WP:Help desk, you will probably enjoy Mentorship as well, and as an experienced editor, you would be well-qualified for it. Mathglot (talk) 22:52, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Service awards § Follow up to service awards criteria. CapnZapp (talk) 09:48, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you are interested in the templates used by the WP:Welcoming committee to welcome new users, your feedback would be appreciated at WT:Welcoming committee/Welcome templates. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 22:57, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]