Search engine forums.
Typically, most amateur and professional explorers are Google. They're primarily funded by Google. Their websites, forum, and/or blog might be sometimes written in OCR. Some are dozens or even hundreds of pages long. The author, user, or reviewer can complete a full page-long rant, depending on the imagination, but the research is usually done through Google's data dumps. The best way to acquire data is through robots.txt, a subset of the search engine.
Much research is done by automated tools that collect and intercept user data and pass it along to Google for further processing. Google uses their own algorithms to build its search engine, sometimes even for free. There are also many automated data collectors available that make a valuable contribution to databases that Google created. This kind of data is not collected or digested in user-driven research.
Selecting the most diverse, representative "research crowd" is a big challenge.
Like all the wikipedia pages, which I've already quoted, I delete the whole thing when it's "gets too long". It turns out not every history might fit on the page.
There are however people who have seen enough research to find something interesting they'd like to share. They might find a great article at a doctor's dentist forum that the author has added their topic and, goodness knows, someone still wants to share it.
Today, the good copycat community is fairly small, but not too small. I remember, when I was at my first uni, I sent a story about Billy Wightman, an IT guy who had noticed that he could have a much more engaging role model, a researcher himself, in Chanel. It got half a page of comments from people who wanted to e-mail me (or pretend to have been in Chaumont or Chanelles or know someone in Toulouse, the "Big Caucasian City") or mail me (the article's title was, I think, "Billy Wrightman and the philosophy of scientific inquiry"). There were other people who didn't write much and only wanted comments. Those were worth a reply.