[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       wikipedia-l
Subject:    Re: [Wikipedia-l] Language versions' popularity vs. number of
From:       "Mark Williamson" <node.ue () gmail ! com>
Date:       2006-03-29 8:42:58
Message-ID: 849f98ed0603290042l545aa159j214c6fa52cd3c4a9 () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Alright, if it's quality you're after (which I certainly agree with),there's another \
statistic that can be used, total database size. Of course, you could fill a database \
with 3 gigabytes of stub pages,but it would be many, many, more stub pages and a much \
more "complete"Stub-Wikipedia than if you were to fill it with 3 gigabytes of \
HQnon-stub articles. It also doesn't take linguistic considerations intoeffect (texts \
in one language may be longer than equivalent texts inanother) It goes (stats from \
December) 1 English - ~2500mb2 German - ~1000mb3 Japanese - ~550mb4 French - ~550mb5 \
Polish - ~300mb6 Italian - ~300mb7 Dutch - ~250mb8 Spanish - ~225mb9 Portuguese - \
~175mb...12 Chinese - ~125mb13 Hebrew - ~125mb...26 Turkish - ~33mb...32 Arabic - \
~26mb The biggest divorce seems to be with the Spanish, Chinese, Arabic, andTurkish \
Wikipedias. This may or may not have something to do with it, but take a look atthe \
Spanish vs French mainpages -- the French one mentions very, veryprominently that \
anyone can edit, the Spanish one does not. TheChinese WP does mention it, I'm not \
100% sure about the Arabic orTurkish. Erik Moeller also has some good points.
Mark
On 28/03/06, ¿ÀÇö¼º <chamdalae@dreamwiz.com> wrote:> Mark,> I don't agree with all of \
your conclusions here....>> >What this says to me is that these Wikipedias are not \
attracting new> >pages proportional to views when compared with other Wikipedias. \
This> >may be because people don't want to write new pages, but it seems to> >me more \
likely that people simply don't know they can.>> There are all kinds of possible \
reasons for this. It isn't necessarily because non-Europeans (and the wikipedias you \
seem to be referring to are mostly non-European wikipedias) are less likely to know \
that they can write new articles. Perhaps people are less interested in writing new \
articles, perhaps they're content with the articles that are there, or perhaps they \
have other ways to spend their time. Perhaps they _are_ increasingly writing new \
articles - some of the wikipedias you listed might still be small, but they are \
growing rapidly.>> >How can this be fixed? Perhaps a site notice inviting people to \
write> >quality pages or register, or a drive to recruit new Wikipedians from> >the \
academic community.>> I think here you're confusing the issues of quantity and \
quality. Writing 'quality pages', or inviting academics to do so, isn't the way to \
boost page count quickly. And I'm sure many academics would be less interested in the \
number of articles a wikipedia has than the quality of those articles anyway. Perhaps \
it would be better to forget about page count and focus on improving the overall \
quality of wikipedia.>> Hyunsung>> >> >Mark> >> >--> >"Take away their language, \
destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin> \
>_______________________________________________> >Wikipedia-l mailing list> \
> >Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org> \
> > >http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l> >>>>>>>> \
> > > -------------------------------------------------> Your Life on the Net> \
> > > DreamWiz Free Mail @ http://www.dreamwiz.com/>> \
> > > _______________________________________________> Wikipedia-l mailing list> \
> > > Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org> \
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l>

--"Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph \
Stalin_______________________________________________Wikipedia-l mailing \
listWikipedia-l@Wikimedia.orghttp://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]