Maybe better when the human generated content is greater than the one originally added by the bot. Otherwise I can imagine someone adding one comma to each article just to make it show up in the stats...
Cheers, Micru
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Per A.J. Andersson paja@telia.com wrote:
Sorry. Just a clarification. I hope you mean bot-generated articles are to be excluded in the tally only as long as they remain non-humanly edited. I see no point in indefinitely excluding some articles from a global tally, as all articles regardless of creation are bound to change content and style over time.
Best of wishes, /Per
2013-06-23, 13:06, skrev Per A.J. Andersson:
2013-06-23, 12:33, skrev Ilario Valdelli:
I am not in the opposition of the use of the bots, if these bots will
have their place and the articles generated by bots are considered like *populated templates* and not like articles.
I think that a solution like this (the pages generated by bots are not included in the sum of articles), may be a really good compromise.
Interesting idea. I'd be willing to accept an article counting first when non-bots have been involved. However, it's up to the local community (and those able to change the arcticle counting mechanism).
Best of wishes, /Per Wikipedia user Paracel63
______________________________**_________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-lhttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
______________________________**_________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-lhttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l