Hoi,
You will appreciate that when text is generated and cached. It may change
when additional statements are made. So it will improve as and when
improved information becomes available.
As someone who knows the IT branch as well, the maintenance of data is a
challenge but you will agree with me that the solution the Wikimedia
Foundation has in its projects is utterly different from what we know
professionally.
In what I do for Wikidata I aim to bring information that is more than can
be found in a single project. For instance, the laureates of awards may
have an item because of an article in "another" Wikipedia. Quite often the
laureates do not have an article in any language even though the award is
prestigious internationally. In this way I hope we will get to the tipping
point where these discussions are only of historic interest in the same way
as many discussions about the quality of Wikipedia.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 7 July 2015 at 13:05, Ilario Valdelli <valdelli(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks to have summarized my position.
As speaker than more than one minor language I agree that there is no sense
to inflate articles over the possibility of the small community to manage
them. Not in opposition of automated generated articles but having in my
hands the experience of project management of IT where the big challenge is
not to produce a software but to keep it updated and efficient.
Il 07/Lug/2015 12:22, "Craig Franklin" <cfranklin(a)halonetwork.net> ha
scritto:
There is already a consensus on enwiki (please,
hold your rotten
tomatoes)
that projects like this which have inflated
article counts due to
extensive
botting rather than through having a lively
community not be included on
the main page. I think a lot of the comments here about a huge article
count attracting communities to curate that content are somewhat
disingenous, it seems that despite having lots of articles there is only
one active user on Waray Wikipedia, who is responsible for more than 99%
of
total edits. As Milos has alluded to,
"number of articles" is a poor
metric for understanding how useful a particular project is to speakers
of
that language.
Speaking here as a speaker of a minority language myself, I understand
the
temptation of quickly creating lots of articles
to have some sort of
demonstrable impact, and I believe there is a place for some bot
generation
of articles on any project. But after hitting
"Random" a few times on
Waray, and seeing what came back, I'm not really sure how this is a more
useful resource for speakers of the language than just going into
Wikidata
with the interface set to Waray. I believe the
time honoured, if slower
way of creating a Wikipedia, lovingly handcrafting it article by article,
is far more likely to lead to a positive impact for people.
Cheers,
Craig
On 7 July 2015 at 07:55, Asaf Bartov <abartov(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Indeed, as Josh points out, there are also costs (even if only
perceived
or
> reputational costs) to populating a tiny Wikipedia with next to no
active
editors
with hundreds of thousands of bot-generated stubs. Is having
stubs
> on all French communes in Cebuano better than having nothing in
Cebuano?
> Probably, yes. And by increasing pageviews
(which is measurable), one
> increases the likelihood of "organic" conversion of readers into
editors
> (which is *still* the most effective way to
make Wikipedians, albeit
not
the
easiest to directly control).
But, again as Josh says, that increase in *editorship* is yet to be
attained. The Waray Wikipedia (btw, "Waray-Waray" is, it turns out,
objectionable to Waray speakers, and is mildly derogatory) is still
largely
edited by *one* committed individual,
User:JinJian[1], as the stats
plainly
> show. Given that the bot was run *with* JinJian's consent, there can
be
no
> objection to its operation.
>
> As Milos suggests, there seems to be an emotional response to those
> Wikipedias appearing in the top 10 view. This should be divorced from
> those communities' sovereign decisions to run or not run the bot. If
the
top 10
inclusion truly bothers people, and there's a strong consensus
that
Wikipedias largely populated by bot-generated
stubs "should" not be
included, a discussion could be had on what this view *should* mean,
precisely, if not plainly the top 10 Wikipedias by article count. And
whatever refined definition is agreed upon (e.g. thresholds like a
minimum
> number of active editors, or some formula involving the "article depth"
> figure, or whatever) can then be made the basis for the list, or
indeed,
for a
different list, that would be more satisfying for those who are
displeased with being "under" these Wikipedias on the list.
A.
[1]
http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaWAR.htm#wikipedians
On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Josh Lim <jamesjoshualim(a)yahoo.com>
wrote:
> I can probably speak for those communities. On the whole, the logic
> behind the Lsjbot experiment was simple: build it and they will come.
>
> So far though, this hasn’t happened. We from the Tagalog Wikipedia
were
> > also approached for this experiment, but we know what happens when
> > bot-generated articles are made: the community is overwhelmed. Out
of
> that
> > fear, we declined to participate.
> >
> > One of the concerns some editors in the Philippines have (and these
are
> > sentiments I share) is that these two
Wikipedias turn us into a
> > laughingstock, willing to increase article numbers at any cost. At
one
> > point, the Cebuano Wikipedia was
described as a Wikipedia of French
> > communes, not content relevant to Cebu or Cebuanos. I don’t think
we’d
> > like that with other Wikipedias in the
Philippines or elsewhere.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Josh
> >
> > > Wiadomość napisana przez WereSpielChequers <
> werespielchequers(a)gmail.com>
> > w dniu 6 lip 2015, o godz. 04:52:
> > >
> > > These are fascinating experiments, I hope that the Waray-waray and
> > Cebuano
> > > communities will at some point report back to the wider community
as
to
> how
> > this worked out. My fear is that too fast a growth rate could
overwhelm
> > > whatever community we have in those languages leading to burn out
of
> > > existing editors dealing with too
many newbies at once, my
suspicion
is
> > > that this will vary by language depending on such variables as the
> ratio
> > of
> > > PC users to smartphone users, and the ease with which editors can
> access
> > > the necessary character sets.
> > >
> > > We have long known that bot creation of stubs that are of interest
to
> > > speakers of a language is a way to
recruit readers, and that some
> readers
> > > become editors. What I think we don't yet know is the maximum
growth
rate
> > that a wiki community can cope with.
> >
> > There is also a sustainability angle, though hopefully we can
mitigate
> that
> > by bot replacing of articles where the source has changed but they
> haven't
> > been edited on the Cebuano or Waray-waray Wikipedias. Otherwise
within
> a
> > > decade we could have pedias that look very dated, for example
various
> record holders whose articles in other languages
show their records
have
> > been surpassed, and villages
> >
> > WereSpielChequers
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> > JAMES JOSHUA G. LIM
> > Bachelor of Arts in Political Science
> > Class of 2013, Ateneo de Manila University
> > Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines
> >
> > jamesjoshualim(a)yahoo.com <mailto:jamesjoshualim@yahoo.com> | +63
(915)
> > 321-7582
> > Facebook/Twitter: akiestar | Wikimedia: Sky Harbor
> >
http://about.me/josh.lim <http://about.me/josh.lim>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Asaf Bartov
> Wikimedia Foundation <http://www.wikimediafoundation.org>
>
> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
the
sum of
all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
https://donate.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>