Although page depth was not really connected with the current trend,  Personally, I think page depth is <u>no longer a reliable</u> metric for comparison, here is why I think so.<div><br><div>Assamese Wikipedia ( 312 articles) : page depth is 339 . </div>
<div>Sindi ( 355 articles): 381</div><div><br></div><div>Compare this with </div><div>Bengali ( 22,062 articles) : 374</div><div>Malayalam ( 16,414 articles) : 320</div><div><br></div><div>It is self-explanatory...</div><div>
<br></div><div>Technically 1 million edits is a cute milestone ( congrats to ml wiki) to take notice, but we cannot consider it as real metric for comparison among Wikipedias. There are language Wikipedias where Google translation/Machine translations or bot created articles are banned or controlled tightly. There are Wikipedias, where they have a free run. Please note that I am not saying taht they are either good or bad. There are Wikipedias where constant updation of articles happening, due a vibrant Wikicommunity. There are Wikipedians who like to work on the articles offline and then bring it live with a single edit. </div>
<div><br></div><div>Having said that, it is advisable to do what each community feels best for their language Wikipedia. Of course, it is good to have an healthy competition :)</div><div><br></div><div>But everybody, please do continue to report such interesting milestones and statistics. We all love that...</div>
<div><br></div><div>-Tinu Cherian </div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Shiju Alex <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:shijualexonline@gmail.com">shijualexonline@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div class="im"><blockquote style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);padding-left:1ex" class="gmail_quote">
We have users in Tamil Wikipedia who bulk upload 100s of complete articles they wrote offline with just one edit per article. <br>
</blockquote><br></div>That happens in all the wikipedias which has an active community. That might also be possible with the the Google translation project. <br><br>In general, quality of a wiki article improves as more people work on it. More edits from more number of users means more quality on the wiki article. Otherwise there is no difference between a knol/blogpost and a wiki article. :)<div class="im">
<br>
  <br><blockquote style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);padding-left:1ex" class="gmail_quote"><b>&quot;Depths above 300 for <a href="http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias#Notes" title="List of Wikipedias" target="_blank">Wikipedias</a> below 100 000 articles have been automatically dismissed as irrelevant.&quot;</b><br>

</blockquote><br></div>Who has mentioned about the depth in the below mail?<div class="im"><br><br><blockquote style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);padding-left:1ex" class="gmail_quote">
When we focus on number of articles, some end up creating useless stubs.
 The same should not happen when we focus on edit counts. </blockquote><br></div>Yes. All wikis has stubs and almost of the articles are created as stub articles. <br><br>Shiju<br><br><blockquote style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);padding-left:1ex" class="gmail_quote">

<br></blockquote><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div></div><div class="h5">On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Ravishankar <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:ravidreams@gmail.com" target="_blank">ravidreams@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>

</div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);padding-left:1ex"><div><div></div><div class="h5">Its not just about stubs. <br><br>We have users in Tamil Wikipedia who bulk upload 100s of complete articles they wrote offline with just one edit per article. One great article can be uploaded in one click and one mediocre article can have 100s of edits. <br>


<br>According to <br><div><br><a href="http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias" target="_blank">http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias</a><br><br></div><b>&quot;Depths above 300 for <a href="http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias#Notes" title="List of Wikipedias" target="_blank">Wikipedias</a> below 100 000 articles have been automatically dismissed as irrelevant.&quot;<br>


</b><br><div class="gmail_quote">When we focus on number of articles, some end up creating useless stubs. The same should not happen when we focus on edit counts. <br><br>Ravi<div><br><br><br>On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 10:18 AM, CherianTinu Abraham <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:tinucherian@gmail.com" target="_blank">tinucherian@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>


<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);padding-left:1ex">What probably Arjuna meant was that, some of Wikipedias are more welcoming to the creation of stub articles. I am not saying that Malayalam Wikipedia doesn&#39;t though... <div>


<br></div><div>-Tinu Cherian <div><div></div><div><br><br></div></div></div></blockquote><br></div></div><br>
<br></div></div><div class="im">_______________________________________________<br>
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org" target="_blank">Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l" target="_blank">https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l</a><br>
<br></div></blockquote></div><br>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org">Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l" target="_blank">https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div>