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(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.**org <Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists…
______________________________**_________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.**org <Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists…