Why did they edit Wikipedia back to the way it was?

Will it be good for wikipedia to give more recognition or acknowledgement (like the satisfaction of a highly upvoted answer,credits etc) to the experts who contribute to it like Quora?

• The recognition (apart from the obvious quora credits) that quora offers is obvious...wont wikipedia too benefit from the same recognition is given to its most talented and best contributors. Think about it if there was a way to harmoniously give adequate recognition it will give more incentive for experts in their fields to come up and share their knowledge EDIT: I know people who contribute to quora or wikipedia expect a lot of praise but it is human nature to expect recognition of some sort... in a satisfying kind of way that you have managed to help people in a significant way (like getting upvotes etc). If nothing else upvotes tell u how many people your answer has reached out to. I guess a better word would be a simple acknowledgment of the contribution that they have done

• Answer:

  The recognition and the benefit of answering on Quora is not actually obvious. I am not aware of research about it, although it may exist. There is, however, research about the reasons why people edit Wikipedia. Put simply, most people do it because they like the idea of sharing knowledge and because it's fun. Literally. So says, for example, the https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Editor_Survey_Report_-_April_2011.pdf. Wikipedia will, without any doubt, acquire more features of a social network. A better notification system and a way to thank editors are being deployed right now, in fact, and more social features are coming. But it's unlikely that credits will be there, because there's no reason to think that they will be very beneficial.