Hi Andreas/Nemo
Which column are you looking at to give you the growth numbers on those
projects?
Richard Symonds
Wikimedia UK
0207 065 0992
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered
Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT.
United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia
movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who
operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control
over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
On 10 January 2013 16:24, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 6:41 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
<nemowiki(a)gmail.com
wrote:
David Gerard, 09/01/2013 00:32:
On 8 January 2013 23:27, Kim Bruning<kim(a)bruning.xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
> I think that the requirements for a wiki (open, welcoming, anyone can
>> edit,
>> eventualism) are always going to be at tension vs the requirements for
an
encyclopedia (reliable, good sourcing, etc).
Right now, en.wikipedia rules are more complex and potentially more
strict than nupedia ever was, and we're running on inertia.
I understand the decline is similar in other wikis - that this is not
at all just an en:wp problem.
How are the numbers for the other Wikipedias? How are the numbers for
the non-Wikipedias?
The main pattern, ie a turning point in 2007, is the same in all
projects,
http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/PlotsPngWikipediansEditsGt5.htm>
http://stats.wikimedia.org/**wiktionary/EN/**PlotsPngWikipediansEditsGt5.*
*htm<
http://stats.wikimedia.org/wiktionary/EN/PlotsPngWikipediansEditsGt5.htm>
http://stats.wikimedia.org/**wikiquote/EN/**PlotsPngWikipediansEditsGt5.**
htm<
http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikiquote/EN/PlotsPngWikipediansEditsGt5.htm>
http://stats.wikimedia.org/**wikisource/EN/**PlotsPngWikipediansEditsGt5.*
*htm<
http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikisource/EN/PlotsPngWikipediansEditsGt5.htm>
(in order of project size/pageviews; graphs
don't include recent data,
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.**org/42318<
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/42318>)
Typically the pattern is the same across all
projects in the same
language. (Almost?) all Russian projects, for instance, are an exception
to
> decline.
> This has often made people wonder if the causes are external (Facebook?
> Facebook is also almost non-existing in Russia, right?).
> Nemo
Actually, Nemo, I don't think that is right at all. If you look at the
German, Spanish or French Wikipedia, for example, the German and Spanish
are totally stable, with no decline at all discernible around 2007, while
editor numbers for the French Wikipedia are actually growing:
http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaFR.htm
http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaDE.htm
http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaES.htm
Summaries and charts for all projects are available here:
http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/Sitemap.htm
These three projects are of a similar age to the English Wikipedia, and
they are definitely not following the same editor retention pattern at all.
I don't know the French and Spanish Wikipedias well, but the German
Wikipedia also generally seems more scholarly than the English one.
Andreas
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l