Conservapedia:Active users

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Conservlogo late april.png
Conservapedia
Introduction
Newcomer's Guide
What is going on?
Commentary
Best of Conservapedia
Blatant Plagiarism
Differences with Wikipedia
Hijacked Articles
"SDG"
"TZB"
"Fab Five"
Sysops
Timeline
CP in the News
In-depth analysis
Active users
Illustrated guide
Fun
Article Matrix
Greatest Insights
Parthian Shots

More about CP
Editors at Conservapedia 2007 - 2013. Only those are shown who made at least 250 comments. SVG: 5.6 MByte

This page is an ongoing analysis of Conservapedia's active (and not-so-active) editors.

Contents


[edit] Ratings

These numbers are a rough guide to how these labels are applied. Contributions during the most recent three months have been selected as one of the criteria for assigning an "activity level": Out of ≈ 25,900 editors who left their mark on Conservapedia, 180 did so over the last three months, showing various degrees of activity:


Year:
Activity Rating Edit Criteria
Übermensch >30 edits per day
Hyperactive >10 edits per day
Very active >3 edits per day
Active >1 edits per day
Semi-active >0.3 edits per day
Comatose >0.1 edits per day
Dead ≤0.1 edits per day
Sum
2014
Jan Mar Apr May
0 0 1 1
1 2 1 1
4 4 5 4
6 6 6 5
13 14 7 8
19 31 25 15
158 144 106 146
201 196 151 180

The busiest 50 of these editors can be found in the following table.

[edit] User chart

This table breaks down an editor's contributions into specific months, calculates an average edit rate, and determines how "active" an editor is using real numbers.

Averages are calculated from date of first edit.

The recent average is the average of the last three months.

A blank entry, rather than a 0, denote the months before a user registered with Conservapedia.

The table includes those editors who made the most comments over the last three months.


Trans H85.gif#
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
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
 
Trans H85.gifUser
Prior

Jun
13

Jul
13

Aug
13

Sep
13

Oct
13

Nov
13

Dec
13

Jan
14

Feb
14

Mar
14

Apr
14

May
14

Total

Average
edits
/day
Recent
edits
/day

Verdict

Joaquín Ma… 15791 105 54 35 42 6 31 24 132 584 1176 1601 777 20429 10.51415 38.63043 Übermensch
Conservati… 55167 952 723 1563 218 216 310 274 681 718 437 474 663 62548 23.50545 17.1087 Hyperactive
TheAmerica… 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 109 586 7 702 19.5 7.63043 Very active
Aschlafly 57370 300 225 115 143 178 252 344 241 297 278 94 155 60006 21.80451 5.72826 Very active
JMR10 2457 17 21 25 43 8 17 16 66 45 169 85 43 3012 1.5462 3.22826 Very active
JoeyJ 59 386 116 82 189 179 191 99 123 152 94 36 147 1856 4.84595 3.01087 Very active
PeterKa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 428 248 168 29 38 976 5.67442 2.55435 Active
Karajou 19892 36 26 55 93 109 81 203 101 46 63 36 66 20810 7.87363 1.79348 Active
Jpatt 15153 11 26 28 40 39 63 31 14 44 43 57 37 15587 5.90864 1.48913 Active
TerryH 7129 63 46 35 34 44 51 41 47 36 35 34 51 7649 2.88642 1.30435 Active
Wschact 1498 11 21 36 80 26 0 1 12 9 54 53 9 1810 2.5104 1.26087 Active
Gregg 1784 78 60 33 5 35 9 0 21 16 24 20 26 2111 0.80327 0.76087 Semi-active
AK 716 178 44 50 18 26 38 53 20 38 52 0 2 1236 1.34641 0.58696 Semi-active
Ukimmoral 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 22 1 24 63 0.6 0.51087 Semi-active
FOIA 6481 38 0 4 20 24 11 11 30 5 8 3 33 6685 2.98304 0.47826 Semi-active
JerryCa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 31 9 10 28 6 92 0.67647 0.47826 Semi-active
JamesWilso… 2871 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 42 2913 2.25116 0.45652 Semi-active
Copleston 202 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 5 20 7 3 247 0.32415 0.32609 Semi-active
Pokeria1 0 34 24 4 0 3 2 26 33 15 3 17 9 172 0.50292 0.31522 Semi-active
EddyLyle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 0 23 11.5 0.25 Comatose
EddyJ 78 76 23 9 13 3 6 24 12 12 9 4 4 274 0.68329 0.18478 Comatose
RandallAW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 2 0 17 0 26 0.28571 0.18478 Comatose
Alpineopos… 16 0 1 0 0 0 4 12 0 0 0 7 8 48 0 0.16304 Comatose
CGL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 7 0 14 1 28 0.24561 0.16304 Comatose
AmeriCan 1145 3 2 2 3 2 14 30 37 10 5 5 4 1263 0.48521 0.15217 Comatose
JohnJustic… 368 5 9 4 9 3 3 4 3 0 12 2 0 422 0.75089 0.15217 Comatose
Adfertygh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 13 13 0.1413 Comatose
CalebJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 7 6 14 0.10853 0.1413 Comatose
JamesWS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 10 6 5 1 29 0.21168 0.13043 Comatose
Redneck4li… 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 12 12 0.13043 Comatose
StevieC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 2 9 1 32 0.35556 0.13043 Comatose
Debletar 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 3 10 0.35714 0.1087 Comatose
EddieS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 1.25 0.1087 Comatose
Panderson 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 1 0 10 1 0.1087 Comatose
Bambifan 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 8 8 0 Dead
DavidE 2608 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 4 2 2 2624 1.01079 0 Dead
DHouser 53 0 4 1 4 0 0 2 5 1 0 8 0 80 0.11923 0 Dead
JamesMashi… 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 8 8 0 Dead
JoanneL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 8 1.33333 0 Dead
RSchlafly 1693 4 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 5 5 2 1 1713 0.64302 0 Dead
SMortlach 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 5 11 0.12941 0 Dead
Ztfreak 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 8 8 0 Dead
DanBond 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 7 0 Dead
GabrielTur… 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 7 7 0 Dead
KAJohnson 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 7 0 Dead
Kc9ioe 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 7 0 Dead
NevaehS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 7 0 Dead
Rafael 273 16 3 0 0 2 0 3 11 0 1 1 5 315 0.12018 0 Dead
W4ffl3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 7 7 0 Dead
Wbushlover 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7 5 1 1 17 0.15596 0 Dead
Total 801245 3963 2223 2666 1367 1224 1292 1752 2533 2747 2915 3331 3963 829992 0 0

[edit] Notably absent

Rank User #edits days since last edit longest previous gap length of stay days of activity av. number of comments over length of stay av. number of comments over days of activity
1 RobSmith 20560 619 265 1872 761 11 27
2 TK 18375 1111 217 1376 930 13.4 19.8
3 RJJensen 17782 1355 23 597 490 29.8 36.3
4 Learn together 13087 1817 14 615 451 21.3 29
5 Philip J. Rayment 11069 1747 21 736 623 15 17.8
6 DeanS 8853 1242 333 1251 749 7.1 11.8
7 Deborah 7998 1724 142 387 133 20.7 60.1
8 AddisonDM 6967 933 333 973 269 7.2 25.9
9 DanH 6638 2022 3 432 410 15.4 16.2
10 Jallen 6484 1637 22 852 350 7.6 18.5
11 CPalmer 6152 257 199 1688 450 3.6 13.7
12 Fox 5840 1862 104 557 182 10.5 32.1
13 Jaques 5632 2336 8 139 107 40.5 52.6
14 Tash 5589 1963 130 527 232 10.6 24.1
15 BrianCo 5467 1797 52 624 227 8.8 24.1
16 SharonS 5409 1527 99 1071 319 5.1 17
17 Chippeterson 4558 996 64 1383 594 3.3 7.7
18 HelpJazz 4545 1854 146 507 269 9 16.9
19 Foxtrot 4388 1728 34 455 198 9.6 22.2
20 Aziraphale 4335 1817 79 672 119 6.5 36.4
21 Dpbsmith 4273 1028 532 1544 198 2.8 21.6
22 HenryS 4135 1855 56 615 311 6.7 13.3
23 NathanG 4059 1904 25 278 172 14.6 23.6
24 JY23 3883 1592 16 362 253 10.7 15.3
25 EdBot 3501 1228 614 890 27 3.9 129.7

[edit] Retention Rate

In March 2011, we find this little exchange on Conservapedia's main talk page:

Wikipdedia Fails to Retain Editors

Wikipedia just admitted that its retention rate for editors has dropped from 40% to 12%. See: http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/March_2011_Update . What they won't admit is that they have allowed politicized cabals to systematically drive off any editors that don't agree with their ultra-liberal world view! Fongman 12:14, 12 March 2011 (EST)

Has anyone here worked out statistics like this for Conservapedia? What is our editor retention rate? --DanN 15:25, 12 March 2011 (EST)
Don't have a numeric answer, but based on experience our retention rate of quality editors is quite high. For example, there were three quality editors who registered at Conservapedia at the very beginning of the massive publicity in February 2007. Two of those three (none of whom I have ever met personally) are still frequent editors today.--Andy Schlafly 17:11, 12 March 2011 (EST)
Wow, I suspect that CP's 67% rate is higher that Wikipedia had even in its heyday! --DanN 18:17, 12 March 2011 (EST)

This gave rise to a little news bit on the main page:

A visitor here posts that "Wikipedia just admitted that its retention rate for editors has dropped from 40% to 12%. [1] What they won't admit is that they have allowed politicized cabals to systematically drive off any editors that don't agree with their ultra-liberal world view!"

Isn't that amazing? The Wikimedia Foundation undertakes a research to better understand the internal dynamics of our communities, publishing hundreds of pages of data, diagrams and conclusions, while Andrew Schlafly is able to identify the inherent problems in a single sentence. So would it help Wikimedia to get rid of its politicized cabals? Let's have a look at the data for Conservapedia, which is absolutely free of an ultra-liberal world view!

For the scope of this survey, we use the definitions of Wikimedia's research project, especially:

  • Active editors refers to registered users who have made five or more edits in the previous month. [...]
  • Very active editors refers to people who have made 100+ edits in the previous months. Very active editors are a subset of active editors.
  • New Wikipedians refers to people who have made their 10th edit in a given month. (So, a person who makes their 10th edit in January 2011 would be considered a New Wikpedian in January, but would cease being one in February)

The term new Conservapedian or new editor will be used analogously.


Let's first have a look at the data from August 2009 until July 2010 (taken from Wikimedia's Editor Trends Study):

All Wikipedias Conservapedia
New Editors Active editors
(> 5 e/mo)
Very active editors
(> 100 e/mo)
New Editors Active editors
(> 5 e/mo)
Very active editors
(> 100 e/mo)
Jul-10 15,380 81,474 10,411 28 98 14
Jun-10 16,143 83,087 10,574 38 116 9
May-10 18,339 88,465 11,115 46 156 9
Apr-10 17,861 86,577 10,871 34 106 14
Mar-10 19,276 90,024 11,224 24 94 16
Feb-10 17,823 85,610 10,747 26 108 14
Jan-10 19,481 90,758 11,475 53 139 15
Dec-09 17,469 84,478 10,443 65 209 25
Nov-09 18,155 86,328 10,510 40 135 18
Oct-09 18,687 86,793 10,836 41 170 17
Sep-09 17,474 84,575 10,834 27 99 13
Aug-09 18,791 87,456 11,103 15 76 13

See how the Wikipedias are failing, while Conservapedia is blooming? But let's have a look at the retention rate. We were informed that Wikipedia's rate dropped to a meager 12%. At the same time, Conservapedia's rate raise to an astonishing 7.5% To make the difference even more obvious, the same scales are used in these diagrams, showing the retention rates and the number of active editors at the Wikipedias and Conservapedia:

Enwp retention vs active editors.png
Ret-cp-001.png
en.wikipedia.org Conservapedia

But perhaps this isn't such a great idea, here another pic for Conservapdia, where the scale for active editors is inflated by the factor 100...

Ret-cp-002.png
Ret-rw-002.png
Conservapedia RationalWiki
(the high retention rate at RationalWiki indicates that it is one of the most conservative wikis...)

For short: Wikipedia's failure to retain its editors is something Conservapedia can only dream of. But perhaps wikipedia should try Andrew Schlafly's approach and define an entity called quality editor: an editor who is likely to stay around. That would improve the retention rate of quality editors dramatically.

[edit] Active Editors Statistics at Conservapedia

Active Users at CP
Active Users at CP who aren't blocked

Conservapedia's own page statistics includes an entry active users. Those are defined as users who have performed an action in the last 7 days, while at the similar page at Wikipedia, this period is set for 30 days. For instance, on June 6th, 2009, Conservapedia counted 165 active users, while Wikipedia had 158,605. Calculating these numbers for both time periods yields this graph - though, for the graph only those users are counted which made at least one edit, and not only performed blocks, etc.

On a first glance, Conservapedia seems to attract twice at many active editors than RationalWiki. But if you take only those editors into account who aren't blocked, the situation changes dramatically: Then RationalWiki (having virtually no blocked members) takes the lead.

As of June 5, 2010, RationalWiki has more active users than Conservapedia even when blocked users are counted on both wikis.


[edit] See also

Personal tools

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Tools
support