--- Pete/Pcb21 <pete_pcb21_wpmail(a)pcbartlett.com> wrote on wikien-l:
> Christopher Mahan wrote:
> I've been meaning to find a peg to hang the following post on ever since
> I lost the post with mav's original 90% growth projections on:
> All the evidence (see below) suggests that Wikipedia has *not* grown by
> a significant amount since the huge explosion in February/March 2004.
Huh? Check out the graph on page one here (again, this model assumes business
The first big bump was in Q1 2004 (Jan-March) and the second, much larger spike
was in June during Q2 2004 (1.21 M hits/day on average). We are still about at
the same level (1.23 M hits/day average) as June, which is about the same as
the figure in the model I developed (1.29 M hits/day average for July 2004).
However that model averages each three month period so we won't know just how
close the estimate is until the end of this quarter.*
But replacing the model figure with the current partial one and extrapolating
for the rest of the quarter still gives 75% more hits/day for Q3 vs Q2 (the
model predicts 85%). That assumes we keep the *same* average we have now for
each month this quarter (1.123 M hits/day). Our average may do down but more
likely it will increase to at least the modeled figure (I fear it may surpass
> ''However'' I do not think it is a coincidence that this four months of
> little growth corresponds almost exactly with the period that Wikipedia
> has "disappered" from Google.
I think we did take a two month hit from that and that may explain why our
traffic only grew by 73% from Q1 2004 to Q2 2003 but we also have to take into
account that our traffic grew 176% from the last quarter of 2003 to the first
quarter of 2004. So that *mere* 73% growth *alone* is in fact more traffic than
we served in all 2003 *combined* (that's right, add up the totals of each of
those 12 months and you are just shy of the *increase* in traffic from the
first three months this year to the second three months).
Given our continued rapid growth in spite of our Google rank situation, I think
an exponentially growing number of people are starting to go to Wikipedia
*first* and then using Google in the increasingly rare cases that Wikipedia did
not have all the info they needed.
So the Google effect, like the previous Slashdot effect, is starting to show
some signs of having somewhat less influence on us, IMO. I won't be surprised
if Google comes to us in a years time trying to push us into having Google ads.
NOTE: I just revised my January filler figure from 5000 K hits/day to 1600 K
hits/day since that is the carry over number from the last time we had data
(October 2003). Also, IIRC the server farm wasn't installed until late January
so a lower figure is probably closer to reality.
> This time last year WP was very often top of typical searches. Now our
> mirrors always come out ahead except for very recently breaking news
> (where they don't have the new content yet). What I term the "second
> generation" mirrors (such as thefreedictionary.com) are "gaming" the
> Google algorithm much better than Wikipedia is, and in a way the older
> mirrors (4reference.net etc) didn't.
This is indeed a problem, but a good one until we can firmly get a handle on
our finances. The server situation would be much worse if the articles we host
were still in the top ten like they were before Google changed their PageRank
criteria. Since we do not get ad revenue from hits and our traffic/popularity
is already growing exponentially, I don't see a problem with our mirrored
content getting higher PageRanks than the originals. At least for now.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
I heard there was some complain surrounding the fundraising message.
I would like to clarify a couple of points, and make a suggestion or two.
The fundraising banner was set because there was an ongoing interview of Jimbo on Slashdot.
Given the number of visits we have each time WP is slashdotted, and given that the last time WP was on /. there were many discussions about donations and other means to get money to run the project, it appeared to be a good choice to make "donation link" temporarily much more visible.
This fundraising banner will only stay up for a couple of days.
This was not planned so we could not really discuss it in length beforehand. It was more an opportunity.
As far as I know, the message was initially set only to be on en.I understood that the message was then made active on all wikipedias, without warning.
And several languages were quite upset by this message. Several criticisms were voiced, and in particular the fact it was not translated.
Some people then started translating the message in their respective languages.
Finally, while several languages were already translated, the message was removed from the non english wikipedias, again without warning. further upsetting some people.
I was not there when that happened but a couple of people told me about it yesterday, in particular Sj who I think helped on the translations, and I saw comments on the french wikipedia as well, since a vote was started to have the banner removed.
I was also nicely explained I should have made a page to explain why the banner was on, how long it would stay on and so on. Of course, that page should have been in 50 languages all at once.
I agree with all this, but it is just not possible that one, or even two people make this all by themselves, in particular when time is short.
This is only possible if more people are automatically made aware of the issue, and can come and help.
Here are the points which were pointed at
1. the fundraising campaign was not discussed beforehand2. Non english wikipedias were not warned before the message was set3. Non english wikipedias were not warned before the message was removed4. Non english wikipedias were not explained the reasons why the message was set,so it came unexpectedly. They were not told either it would be temporary.5. The message appeared everywhere in english, and people did not know how to have it translated6. The message is not pretty (location in the page, red border, police size...)7. The message appears on every page (not enough discretion)
If we let aside the fact it was decided very quickly, so not discussed before hand, I see two major issues at stake here.
First, the message is not pretty and is �defacing� the wikipedia pages. Each time this banner is up, people complain about it.
Would it be possible that someone try to think where it would be best to place it, and to have it be visible, but not outrageously visible ?
The second issue is simple. It is just a communication issue between projects.
We discussed it with Sj yesterday, and here is a proposal.
Within one project, communication works quite well.
Mailing lists is another channel, but it only covers some of the people. Not everyone is registered to wikipedia-l or foundation-l or wikitech-l. And not everyone understands english. And unfortunately, it seems few of those understanding take the time to have the information flow.
IRC is a great information channel when speed is required, but again, not everyone is on irc.
Meta is getting slowly a rather good information channel, but only those visiting meta know the information, and again do not necessarily spread it. I doubt very much goings-on are regularly updated on most projects. The source is reliable, but structurally very slow, because people do not come everyday.
So, in the end, the ONLY way to have information be known on all projects, by everyone and very rapidly, is this little red banner. This is why we use it for server downtime warning, for elections warning, for fundraising and such.
I think another tool would be very much welcome. What I would like to see is something similar to the current �you have a message�. A little warning at the top of every page (anonymous included), indicating the editor that new global information is available. For example, when a down time is planned 48 hours in advance, do we really need a huge and highly visible message on each page for 48 hours ? Not really, we just need to be warned once, and the highly visible banner could be set just before the down actually occur.I could figure an additional link in the menu, where we could add global information, for example [[Global news]].
The information could be added one paragraph at a time on meta, and in english. It could be in a mediawiki page or a form.
Once edited, it would appear on all projects, in english by default, but will be editable easily for translation (just as a mediawiki page, and in this case, it will always be a unique mediawiki page, so users won�t have to look for the page to translate it). That way, anyone reading the message first, could translate it at once for the other readers.
Each time the meta message page is updated (each time a message is added to the meta page, or through a form), a warning of the type �you have a message� would appear to all users on all projects. They can click on it to access the global news page.
Once the page is read, the warning message would disappear, but the information still be available from the menu in the �global news� page.
Each language would be responsible from cleaning up their message page little by little, for translating it, or not translating it (depending on the local editors)I do not foresee a new message being added every day. We should be careful not to abuse of it, and really use it for relevant information, when we want information to be delivered very quickly or when we really want to ensure every one is informed.
I view it a bit like the announcement-l mailing list which was an attempt to do this, but never really worked. I think doing it directly on the website would ensure that everyone is really aware of the announcement and every one can easily participate to its translation.
Is this technically possible ? Is this suitable ? What do you think ? Do you have other ideas ?
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
David Gerard wrote:
> On 07/15/04 12:47, Anthere wrote:
>> 6. The message is not pretty (location in the page,
red border, police
> We fiddled with it last night (see the edit history)
to make it less
> obnoxious. Centering it and putting it in italics
seems to make it
> less obnoxious. I would have made it <small> as
well, but that doesn't
> look so good in Monobook or Cologne Blue skins.
(Perhaps someone who
> knows css well enough can change the 'classic' skin
to render the
> template in small ...)
>> 7. The message appears on every page (not enough
> That's a ridiculous objection. The Wikipedia logo
also appears on every
> page. Current Events appears on every page.
Presumably the servers are
> bought using air ...
> - d.
I agree. But still that is an objection which was
made. And this is one of the reason why the message
was removed from non en pedias.
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
>This looks great! Now we just need to have the form's text factored into
>separate site-specific messages and translated for other WPs... I don't
>know of a good place to announce such translation needs, so I created
>a section for it at [[meta:Translators#Translation Requests]]. Comments on that
>translation template would be appreciated.
>Must there be a vote before this can be implemented? Has anyone
>suggested we not implement such a form?
Nobody on wikide-l has objected to the idea of having a form, and the
response there was generally quite positive. Given the need for a form
that requires source and license information, I haven't heard any
objections to the basic idea and I'm not sure what reasonable objections
there could be. If somebody wants to call a vote, they're welcome to,
but I would say we already have a consensus on that much.
As to the exact details of the form, those can be worked out in our
usual collaborative way. Somebody else later mentioned a model they had
been working on (http://www.rainerzenz.de/wikitest.html), which has a
radio button to choose GFDL or public domain, but no required source
field. This doesn't help us meet the legal requirements for fair use
images, so I think Andre's form is the basic outline we have to work
from. Improvements are welcome, but the longer we delay, the bigger the
backlog of inadequately documented images.
The text of the instructions given to uploaders, and the choice of which
licenses to accept, are separate policy issues. There's no need to
debate those just to get this form implemented.
I saw a couple reports of minor appearance issues with Andre's form,
>Mit Opera 7.20 überlappt das Bild und Teile der Navigationsleiste
A little bit of testing should be able to iron out these problems.
>P.S. you sent that mail to wikilegal-l too...
Timwi, I think you do not understand. I do not send
mail to wikilegal-l, I merely REPLY to a mail sent to
foundation-l. And when I reply to most mails sent to
foundation-l, these mails are ***automatically*** sent
to wikilegal-l because wikilegal-l is one the
newsgroup the *original* sender sent the mail to. I
can not do anything to change the newsgroup to which
they are sent.
This newsgroup is gmane.org.wikimedia.legal.
This newsgroup should not exist any more. It should be
Now, here is what I think. The legal list was not
closed properly, or the gmane system was not warned
that this list did not exist any more, and now the
whole system is bugged.
Is it possible that the legal list is really closed ?
Or that gmane is explained that the list does not
exist anymore and the newsgroup
gmane.org.wikimedia.legal deleted ?
Or could the legal list be reopened so that the mails
are retrieved and can go through again ?
Any solution is fine by me. I would just like that I
can use the system again and that half of my mails are
Or could I be registered to the legal list, and my
mails automatically authorized ?
If no one can do anything for me, could I have the
*password* of the legal mailing list so that I could
authorized myself, or at least retrieve my mails each
time they are blocked there ?
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
I think this is something that should be reviewed and implemented
right away. It is long overdue. Perhaps after some discussion, the
board should even vote on it to make it clearly official.
----- Forwarded message from Michael Snow <wikipedia(a)earthlink.net> -----
From: Michael Snow <wikipedia(a)earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 20:01:11 -0700
Subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: [Wikide-l] Neues Uploadformular
I thought I should act on Andre's suggestion at wikide-l that this
proposal be discussed globally, so I forwarded and translated his post
in my previous message. If you take a look at the test upload form, it's
in German, but if any non-German-speakers have questions about it, feel
free to ask. Now for my comments.
Field 6, as with the current form, asks the user to confirm that the
copyrightholder agrees to the licensed use. Field 4 asks who created the
image and/or what is the source. Field 5 asks you to choose a license;
the options provided are GFDL, CC-by, CC-by-sa, and unknown. As
indicated, if you choose unknown, you get a message first about our
policy for using licensed images. All of these fields are required.
I think Andre has done excellent work, and this upload form should be
implemented on all Wikipedias as quickly as possible. I actually care
less about making users input licensing information, but as I've said
repeatedly, we absolutely need an upload form that *requires* source
information. This matters even more for Wikipedias that, unlike the
German Wikipedia, allow fair use images. According to international law,
we *must* provide source information in order to have copyrighted images
under fair use (or as the Berne Convention calls it, fair practice).
Wikipedia-l mailing list
----- End forwarded message -----
I do not answer to any mails sent to wikilegal-l.
I have taken up the /Staff section of of the grant
Having consulted with others the best way to do this
seems to be for
anyone willing to help with the grant to send a r�sum�
will compile them. Please tailor your
experiences/education towards relevancy to WikiMedia.
We are especially interested in r�sum�s from
bureaucrats, but all are necessarily welcome. All
Board members are
asked to submit. In addition, we need as many people
as possible to
answer the following questions. Please do not reply
to the mailing
list, but to
This will prevent clutter and will
maintain your privacy/anonymity.
1) What is your full name and nickname? (Include a URL
to your user page).
2) Describe your duties at Wikipedia and
qualifications for those
duties. If you have a title what is your title, and
how long have you
3) Indicate the amount of time that you, the projects
anticipate committing to the project on a monthly
basis (hours), and
for how many months, years.
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
The fundraising notice for the German Wikipedia has been temprarily
disabled. We think that since the German Verein will need a few more
days to be able to receive donations ...
It would be counterproductive to direct people to a page prompting them
to make donations to a US account. Knowing Germans, that will result in
relatively few donations. (Many Germans, for example, don't have a
credit card.) If on the other hand we wait for a few days, until the
bank account for the Verein has been set up, we estimate that we will
recieve much more donations.
It would be nice if such actions were discussed beforehand.
>Walter, I just sent you an answer to your mail posted
>My mail was send to foundation-l via gname
>In case you wonder, the gname also indicates *you* are
>one of those posting to the legal list
>just as alterego
>and just as michael snow
Sorry, I wasn't aware until now that I was considered part of the
problem. To be honest, I couldn't see what the problem was, as all
messages I saw came from foundation-l, appeared to be sent to
foundation-l, and whenever I send something myself I just click reply,
and that goes to foundation-l too. There was no sign of wikilegal-l
anywhere for me.
From checking the subscriber list, what all of us have in common is
that we receive the mailing list in digest mode. I'm not sure why this
would cause such a glitch, but from what I know I'm pretty sure it's not
on my end - I'm not sending anything to wikilegal-l, and if I tried I
assume it would get rejected the same as for Anthere. I notice that
Alterego, one of the other people mentioned, wasn't even around for the
existence of wikilegal-l, so there's no reason he would be sending stuff
there. This makes me think the problem is with gmane.
> Thank you to the person who added the fundraising link at the top of the
> main page :-)
We really really seriously need to make these messages wiki-editable.
For some reason, I *always* find something wrong with them ;-)