Which of the two contradictory colorings on http://infodisiac.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/UniqueActiveEditorsOnS... is correct?
See the graphs for 5+ editors here:
http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikibooks/EN/ChartsWikipediaZZ.htm http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikiquote/EN/ChartsWikipediaZZ.htm http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikinews/EN/ChartsWikipediaZZ.htm
It is wikinews that has been loosing contributors since mid 2008, and new articles per day has dropped since late 2010.
Wikibooks contributor count fluctuates a lot.
Wikiquote is fairly static, but using a constant number of contributors to justify 'stagnant' isnt accurate. The content metrics of Wikiquote indicate it is still growing, at a fairly constant rate.
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 9:07 AM, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
Which of the two contradictory colorings on http://infodisiac.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/UniqueActiveEditorsOnS... is correct?
Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hi John,
Thanks for these details...
On Wed, 26 Mar 2014, at 13:19, John Mark Vandenberg wrote:
See the graphs for 5+ editors here:
http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikibooks/EN/ChartsWikipediaZZ.htm http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikiquote/EN/ChartsWikipediaZZ.htm http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikinews/EN/ChartsWikipediaZZ.htm
I find it humorous that this page says "number of Wikipedians" for some other language editions.
It is wikinews that
Careful about wording there. "English" Wikinews. Other language editions are different.
has been loosing contributors since mid 2008, and
And obtaining too -- the stats show the sum of those who joined and those who left I believe.
new articles per day has dropped since late 2010.
That's around when they introduced the peer review. (Again, just the English version.)
Wikibooks contributor count fluctuates a lot.
Wikiquote is fairly static, but using a constant number of contributors to justify 'stagnant' isnt accurate. The content metrics of Wikiquote indicate it is still growing, at a fairly constant rate.
Right; I'm personally quite disliking these statistics, as the software has no means implemented to merge edits, such as when I make a typo. I keep struggling to find means to reduce the edit count to make things easier for others to track.
Gryllida.
As noted, the graph highlights that editors of Wikiquote are stable, while Wikinews (as well known) is dropping. The long-term graphs are at http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikiquote/EN/PlotsPngWikipediansEditsGt5.htm (https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/42318 to have it functional). Wikiquote keeps expanding, especially Italian and Russian, and with the exception of German and Portuguese (all of this since several years ago; Polish and French go up and down): * http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikiquote/EN/TablesDatabaseSize.htm * http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikiquote/EN/TablesWikipediansEditsGt5.htm
Note that it's easy for stats on Wikiquote active editors to give a false picture, especially in English where over half of edits come from unregistered users and the top class of editors only has 21 % of edits. http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikiquote/EN/TablesWikipediaEN.htm#anonymous Wikiquote attracts new and occasional contributors, in most languages. That's a feature, not a bug. ;-)
Nemo
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org