Just one more suggestion about attracting vols.
This is from the WikiMedia Foundation's (WMF) strategy process. You can see it mentions two types of groups. OERers, I think, are the first kind of group; "there are groups who may want to register and operate on a formal basis, but whose interest is to promote not all of the Wikimedia projects but a certain language, culture or subject matter". I call them "disciplinary centric".
You might have seen the obvious suggestion that if someone is reading an article on one of the WMF projects, there would be a link on the page ot a place where one could have a discussion with the group, or even another site where qualifies people coud get together to improve/rewrite an article. (there has been one discussion about "it was so poor an article, i didn't know here to start, except from the scratch".)
So there there are a couple of approaches. Firstly, work with the WMF to answer these two questions. "Can we propose an horizontal relationship between chapters and partner organizations when these have a smaller area of interest and do not operate on the same basis? If we indeed have an asymmetrical relationship, how will we define it?"
The other one, which is one that seems to go the heart of the problem, is addressing the classification of groups, where every organisation/institution goes through this discussion about "external vs. internal". It's a problem that when an organisation puts up a domain which then points to "their groups" it immediatedly creates this barrier to others doing much the same thing. So encouraging them to share (a) domain(s) whose applications are shared by "their groups", and pointed to by each institutional domain, appears to be the only way by which they might aggregate their content.
You'd understand that my terms of reference in this inquiry don't use the word "attract". The word I use is "aggregate" or "coalesce". Does this mean we're rewording one another:)? A safe and happy Xmas to all.