"logged-in only" editing
Do you have a link to that data? I'd like to have it bookmarked for further reference.
That's one nail in the coffin... suggests to me that trying logged-in only editing isn't worth the trouble.
Would Russian be ok? Otherwise, I can translate it, but the translation will take some time.
Now also read Eric's post below. I will try to translate quickly.
I'd really love to read that as well... and since the amount of Russian I know will fit in a thimble (mostly names of food), a quickie translation would be great... even if you just ran it through google translate for a first pass...?
A translation would help. But even just the raw numbers should be understandable, no? Either way, we'd appreciate any information you can give us.
OK, I post it here, please feel free to move to an appropriate place.
For the record, the whole discussion (in Russian): ru:Википедия:Обсуждение правил/Запрет на создание новых статей анонимными участниками. The statistics are summarized in the preamble.
Statistics 1: ru:Участник:Skydrinker/Анонимы и новые статьи. Summary: User Skydrinker monitored over the weekend 12/13.01.10 newly created articles (six times, different times of the day). In total, he looked at 300 articles; of these 300, 72 articles were created by unregistered users (24%). Out of these 72, 61 (84.7%) were speedy deletion material. To be precise, 8 - nonsense, 6 - empty, 19 - copyvio, 7 - obvious vandalism, 12 - not notable, 7 - spam or ads, 2 - not in Russian. Eventually, 6 out of these 61 have been improved by experienced users; 3 speedy deletion reviews were contested and sent to usual deletion review. Another 11 (=72 - 61) articles did not qualify for speedy deletion and eventually have been improved as a part of regular flagged revision procedure.
(to be continued)
Statistics 2: ru:Участник:Шуфель/Статистика (новых статей). 460 articles created in the period 22.12.09-31.12.09 have been monitored. Eventually, 122 articles have been deleted (8 be deletion review, others by speedy deletion process). Here is the summary:
| user class | articles created | % of total | deleted | % of created | flagged | %(flagged/all) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ip | 127 | 28% | 80 | 63% | 29 | 62% |
| not-autoconf | 42 | 9% | 29 | 69% | 8 | 62% |
| user | 106 | 23% | 12 | 11% | 48 | 51% |
| autoeditor | 83 | 18% | 1 | 1% | 81 | 99% |
| editor | 95 | 21% | 0 | 0% | 95 | 100% |
| sysop | 7 | 2% | 0 | 0% | 7 | 100% |
| Total | 460 | 100 % | 122 | 27 % | 268 | 79 % |
The conclusion is that the quality of articles created by unregistered users is virtually the same as the quality of articles created by non-autoconfirmed users.