New subject: Benchmark of Versions

3 Feb 2015

      Anders,
Sounds like an interesting test, but what were the home ranges of the six bird species? If they are not native to China or Japan but native to Catalonia and the Basque Country then it is a little more understandable that they are in some Wikipedias and not others. I can appreciate that ultimately all bird species might merit an article in every version of Wikipedia, but clearly we have a long way to go in many languages and it would not be unreasonable to start with birds that are likely to be seen by people who speak that language. Atomic elements, planets and parts of the human body might be more culturally neutral topics for a benchmark.
Regards
Jonathan Cardy
...
On 2 Feb 2015, at 16:01, wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
Send Wikimedia-l mailing list submissions to
   wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
   https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
   wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
   wikimedia-l-owner@lists.wikimedia.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Wikimedia-l digest..."
Today's Topics:

Benchmark of versions (Anders Wennersten)
Re: Its not goodbye, but au revoir (Richard Symonds)

Message: 1
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2015 16:53:42 +0100
From: Anders Wennersten mail@anderswennersten.se
To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Benchmark of versions
Message-ID: 54CE4C06.8010101@anderswennersten.se
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
As a test of our status of the different language versions of Wikipedia, 
I have done a small survey of that status of Birds. There exist just 
over 10000 species, very well documented and there are people interested 
of birds all over the world, so it should be be possible for all 
versions to have complete set of articles for all bird species.
I used a small sample of just 6 species and gave article a mark between 
1-5, where 1 is substandard, 2 extremely elementary, 3 OK, 4 good, 5 
complete
Versions which seems to have all species
*en  4 of 6 botgenerated and stubmarked given  mark 2,5 by me. The other 
two were created manually and were given mark 4,5 and 5 by me
*nl 4 or 5 of 6 bot, given 2,5  the sixth given 4
*sv  5 of 6 bot, given  2,5 , the sixth given 3
*vietnamese all bot given 2
*bg all bot given 2
*basque all bot given 2
versions with 5 out of 6 species
*es all manully created, given 2-5
*fr all manually created, given 2,5-4
versions with 3-4 out of 6
*fi 3 manually created, given 2-2,5
*pt 4 where of two bot, bot given 2,5, the manual given 1,5 and 4
*farsi 3 all bot, given 2
*catalan 3 all bot, given 2
of the rest can be mentioned
*punjabi &  croatia who had 1 botgenerated, given 1-1,5
*esperanto botgeneted the only one not direct from source but from otehr 
language version
*germany who had only one specie manually created but that given 5 from me
( 1-2 manually created also was found from it, pl, hungary, russia, 
serbocroatia, africaans and malay)
It is also worth mentioning that a little over 50% have pictures in 
Commons, used by all, but one bird had only a picture locally uploaded 
on Malay and Finnish Wikipedia
I also wonder why Japanse and Chinese wre all missing out, are they not 
fond of birds or are their interwiki not working?
it gives me a total of 11 verions who have used bots to generate (and 
Cebuano and Winary which I did not include). Is not a combination of 
botgenerted ones manually checked and complemented a preferred option 
besides the one who will be extensively written all manually
Anders

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Benchmark of Versions