Hoi,
Check out the number of users on the Persian Wikipedia and compare it with
the number of people actually editing..
Any metric is wrong; there is no one size fits all solution.
NB On wiktionary there is nothing wrong with using bots to create content.
What you do not see is the preparation that went before they actually
uploaded things.
It is not nice nor is it correct to talk down on the effort of the
Vietnamese Wiktionary crowd.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 2/5/07, Brianna Laugher <brianna.laugher(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Of the top 100 projects (according to # of articles[1]), here are some
statistics:
*only about 10 have made significant changes to
MediaWiki:Welcomecreation, the first page their new registered users
will see.
This is a big missed opportunity for projects to impress their
standards and methods on their newest user.
*23 either don't welcome new users by template, or if they do, their
template doesn't have an interwiki link to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Welcome and I was not able to
find the local equivalent. (For non-Wikipedia projects, I checked to
see if they had a template with the same name as their Wikipedia
equivalent, assuming *it* had a valid interwiki link.) These projects
are: EL.wikt, FI.wikt, DE.wikt, HU.wikt, VI.wikt, KU.wikt, BG.wikt,
TH.wp, ES.ws, CEB.wp, GL.wikt, ID.wikt, SQ.wp, KO.wikt, BPY.wp,
ET.wikt, FA.wikt, SU.wp, WA.wp, SH.wp, SCN.wp, KU.wp, LV.wp.
If you speak one of these languages PLEASE ADD THE INTERWIKI LINK to
the English one, or just reply and tell me the name of it! :)
This top 100 covered 4 special wikis (commons, meta, species,
nostalgia), 1 wikinews (EN), 1 wikibooks (EN), 1 wikiquote (EN), 5
wikisource (EN, PT, ES, FR, ZH), 26 wiktionaries (...) and 62
wikipedias (...).
If you want to improve these pages for your pet project, I recommend
"shopping around" and picking a design you like. Formulating the text
is also very important but much harder for one person to judge over 62
languages :)
Best so far (at least, these have elements that I think are worth
considering including in your redesign):
MediaWiki:Welcomecreation
* VI.wikt:
http://vi.wiktionary.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Welcomecreation
* FR.wp:
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Welcomecreation
* KO.wikt:
http://ko.wiktionary.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Welcomecreation
* SR.wp:
http://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B0%D0%92%D0%…
* ID.wp:
http://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Welcomecreation
Template:Welcome (or equiv.)
* ES.wp:
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plantilla:Bienvenido_usuario
* MK.wp:
http://mk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A8%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%BD:%D0%94%D0…
* ZH.wp:
http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:%E6%AC%A2%E8%BF%8E
* NL.wp:
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sjabloon:Welkom
* PL.wp:
http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Szablon:Witaj2
* EN.wikt:
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Template:pediawelcome (as
a contrastive message)
cheers,
Brianna
[1] In hindsight I should have used the table ordered by number of
users rather than pages. Some projects have page numbers falsely
boosted by huge bot imports, for example VI.wikt.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l