Possible "major points and findings" (BROAD focus)

I agree with Woodwalker. We have some expertise in projects different from en.wp, and they seem to have many common features, so that the above points are relevant to some extent for all of them.

On the other hand, smaller wikipedias have markedly different problems. For instance, I have close relations with admins of crh.wp and xal.wp - these are the projects with several hundred articles. They are really happy to accept any non-vandal contribution, and they are very far from the state when all "low-hanging fruit" has been consumed. They have more issues like establishing the proper spelling (on xal.wp the four active native speaker participants had a quarrel about the geographic names of countries, and apparently the reliable sources on this subject do not exist in their language at all - and one contributor left the project since his version was rejected). Obviously our point are not valid for such small projects. To help them, I believe one needs to approach them separately.

I am also ashamed to say I do not have a slightest idea on what happens on the projects other then Wikipedia and whether our discussion apply over there.