On 10/16/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 16/10/2007, Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com wrote: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Enwikipedia_articles_bios_pct_200710...
So what did you do for numbers before [[Category:Living people]] was created in late 2005?
Rejoice for the the impossible super-intelligence of hindsight: If an article is *currently* a living person bio it *always was*. The graph doesn't include the last few weeks of data because tagging needs time to handle new creations.
Obviously this doesn't allow us to count biographies which have since been deleted... but the hundreds of "Mike is Gay!" bios deleted every day(?) just moments after creation would probably add enough noise to make the graph unreadable. :)
As such these graphs provide insight into the composition of Wikipedia somewhere more so than into the editing practices of the users.
Can someone please explain why Rambot appears to have sparked two years of exponential growth of *biographies*? :)
I don't recall seeing any appeals to write bios to offset the rambot geostubs.