Birgitte SB: please read ThomasV's statement a little bit up this thread, the one where he explains why and for what level 0 was introduced in the beginning. That is one of the problems. Each community considers something different to fall among that state.
With the last PR2-update it suddenly was no more possible to switch already finished projects to PR2, because it was disabled for a person to immediately select 'finished'-state. As an example (I did that switch to PR2 just a few days before):  http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Seite:De_Neue_Thalia_Band1_385.jpg was immediately set to finished because the poem was already proofreaded twice (http://de.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Das_Bildni%C3%9F&action=history). But it belonged to a large story collection (http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Index:Neue_Thalia,_Erster_Band) which also is just a part of seven such books. They are part of our currently most important community project which should be finished until November 10th. Because of the short time left all books were switched to PR2 so that more people can work on them and also have a better overview which poem/story/... in which book is already finished and which not. I finished the whole switch just a few days before the mediawiki-update. A few days later I would not have been able anymore to set the pages to 'finished'.
When I complained about that to ThomasV, he suggested to use level 0 for it, since it is a finished page and no more proofreading needs to be done. He would even rename the 'without text' to fit it better and the pages still would land in category 'finished'.

Does this sound to you like the statistics of this level would be useable to determine how many pages a project has finished and how many there are that are just empty? Not to me. So those people who for some reason need statistics wouldn't be able to get a real result out of it anyway, because one projects uses it for really empty pages, the other one also for those with less than ~10 words and the next one for pages that do not need proofread for some or the other reason, even if they are full of text.

Cecil



(The other solution suggested by ThomasV would have been to create a list of all pages and which state they are and then let a bot or a second user correct the state of those pages that I would not be able to do. The 7 Thalia-bands have 3279 pages full of text and a few more with index, introduction, headers and first pages, so you can imagine how difficult it would have been to maintain those lists without any chaos and always obtain a format that the bot can deal with.)



2009/10/14 Michael Jörgens <joergens.mic@googlemail.com>
Birgitte SB that was the reason, why my text wasn't as polite as it should be. It sounded off-topic for me.


joergens.mi

2009/10/14 Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb@yahoo.com>
Thank you for explaining, this discussion would have been off-topic in the other thread.  I am not someone that finds statistics to be a big deal, but I have learned that others feel deeply about such issues.  The statistics total all pages marked "4" and report this as the number of pages a subdomain has proofread and validated.  So when compared to other subdomains which mark empty pages with "0" the numbers of de.WS are slightly inflated.  The current state of things is that other subdomains do not count empty pages in their totals while de.WS does.  I appreciate your introducing the situation to the local community.

Birgitte SB

--- On Wed, 10/14/09, Michael Jörgens <joergens.mic@googlemail.com> wrote:

> From: Michael Jörgens <joergens.mic@googlemail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Wikisource-l] Pages without text
> To: "discussion list for Wikisource, the free library" <wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> Date: Wednesday, October 14, 2009, 2:29 PM
> Sorry, that was my fault, I didn't read
> the topic right, i thougt this discussion is still part of
> the topic  [Wikisource-l]
> Proofreading.
>
> From
> my personal point of view, there is no difference between
> this pages. I see no need to distinguish empty und full
> pages. The final state means, all work needed is done with
> this page. 
> In
> general I like statistiks, but never mind,  I would never
> count empty pages. 
> On
> the other hand if others like to do, no problem in
> general. 
> I
> think we will introduce this question to our community and
> we will make a decision. Changes can be done by bot, as I
> understand.
>
>
> sincerly
> joergens.mi
> 2009/10/14 Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb@yahoo.com>
>
> I sorry you find the concerns other people have to be
> "empty" and "silly".  Perhaps in the
> future you could ignore the threads on smaller issues
> without comment.  It would really help keep things more
> congenial.
>
>
>
>
> Birgitte SB
>
>
>
> --- On Wed, 10/14/09, Michael Jörgens <joergens.mic@googlemail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > From: Michael Jörgens <joergens.mic@googlemail.com>
>
> > Subject: Re: [Wikisource-l] Pages
> without text
>
> > To: "discussion list for Wikisource, the free
> library" <wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
>
> > Date: Wednesday, October 14, 2009, 12:15 PM
>
> > Is there a need for
> this
>
> > ''empty discussion'' about empty
> pages
>
> > here, 
>
> > The main point ist to find an for all acceptable
>
> > way of working together with Thomas. In a way
>
> > that Thomas is satisfied and feels comfortable,
>  taking the
>
> > problems he see's into concern and the problems
> some
>
> > projects have. 
>
> > And it should be a compromise that all can accept,
>
> > without feeling overruled by others.
>
> > With this in the background the other discussion
>
> > is simply silly.  Some are talking about some pages,
> which
>
> > in total are below 1%, there are bigger issues to
>
> > solve.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > sincerly joergens.mi
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > 2009/10/14 Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb@yahoo.com>
>
> >
>
> > I
>
> > disagree in general with the idea that everyone must
>
> > conform.  There is room for the communities to
> develop
>
> > their own solutions.  Hopefully when one community
> proves
>
> > that some solution has good results others will learn
> from
>
> > their experience and adopt it.  But there needs to be
> room
>
> > for experimentation.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > In this specific case, it seems to me this is more of
>
> > legacy issue on de.WS rather than a deliberate choice.
>  If
>
> > they (as well as every other subdomains) conform to
> the
>
> > standards the majority of Wikisources use then the
>
> > comparative numbers between Wikisources will be more
>
> > accurate.  I don't see a strong reason for de.WS
>
> > deciding to not conform here.  But it is a bunch of
> tedious
>
> > work and it should be thoroughly discussed.  It would
> be
>
> > very nice if de.WS took the time to consider the issue
> and
>
> > let us know what the consensus turns out to be.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > However we can always make a footnote when people
> choose to
>
> > count things differently and estimate with data
> crunching.
>
> >  (i.e. Of 1000 validated pages on the top three
> non-de.WS
>
> > subdomains the average number of empty pages is X
> (A%),
>
> > therefore an estimate of de.WS validated non-empty
> page is
>
> > the given total minus the A% of the given total)
>  This is
>
> > not an unsolvable issue and I am sure sooner of later
> some
>
> > subdomain will discover a good reason to do something
>
> > differently.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Birgitte SB
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > --- On Wed, 10/14/09, Syagrius <syagrius@gmx.fr>
>
> > wrote:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > > From: Syagrius <syagrius@gmx.fr>
>
> >
>
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikisource-l] Pages without text
>
> >
>
> > > To: "discussion list for Wikisource, the
> free
>
> > library" <wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
>
> >
>
> > > Date: Wednesday, October 14, 2009, 10:47 AM
>
> >
>
> > > #yiv579852079 html, #yiv579852079
>
> >
>
> > > {}#yiv579852079 html
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
> {width:100%;height:100%;margin:0px;padding:0px;}#yiv579852079
>
> >
>
> > > {font-size:100.01%;font-family:Verdana, Geneva,
>
> > Arial,
>
> >
>
> > > Helvetica,
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
> sans-serif;background-color:transparent;background-image:none;margin:0px;padding:5px;}#yiv579852079
>
> >
>
> > > p {margin:0px;padding:0px;}#yiv579852079
>
> >
>
> > > {font-size:12px;font-family:Verdana, Geneva,
> Arial,
>
> >
>
> > > Helvetica,
>
> >
>
> > >
> sans-serif;background-color:#FFFFFF;}#yiv579852079 p
>
> >
>
> > > {margin:0;padding:0;}#yiv579852079 blockquote
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
> {padding-left:5px;margin-left:5px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-top:0px;}#yiv579852079
>
> >
>
> > > blockquote.quote {border-left:1px solid
>
> >
>
> > > #CCC;padding-left:5px;margin-left:5px;} If the
>
> > Wikisources have adopted
>
> >
>
> > > some common rules, every sublanguage
>
> > should follow it. On
>
> >
>
> > > the other hand, I don't understand why you
>
> > don't
>
> >
>
> > > want to transform these empty pages, since en.ws
>
> > and fr.ws
>
> >
>
> > > already did it and a bot could do it very
> easily.
>
> > There
>
> >
>
> > > would be absolutely no loss of quality or
>
> > credibility...
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Syagrius
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > ----- Message
>
> >
>
> > > d'origine -----De : John
>
> >
>
> > > VandenbergEnvoyés : 14.10.09 02:03À :
>
> >
>
> > > discussion list for Wikisource,       the
> free
>
> >
>
> > > libraryObjet : Re: [Wikisource-l] Pages without
>
> >
>
> > > text On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:12
>
> > AM, Cecil
>
> >
>
> > >  wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > > Syagrius, could you please explain why this
> would
>
> > be
>
> >
>
> > > "irrespectuous toward
>
> >
>
> > > > other wikisources" when we mark them as
> part
>
> > of a
>
> >
>
> > > 'finished' project?
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > It is not a part of the same work.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Advertisements are a _different_ work, and it has
> not
>
> > been
>
> >
>
> > > transcribed.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > It should be marked as a incomplete.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Advertisements are also sources....
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Category:Advertisements
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > :-)
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > --
>
> >
>
> > > John Vandenberg
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > _______________________________________________
>
> >
>
> > > Wikisource-l mailing list
>
> >
>
> > > Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>
> >
>
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
>
> >
>
> > >  
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > _______________________________________________
>
> >
>
> > > Wikisource-l mailing list
>
> >
>
> > > Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>
> >
>
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > _______________________________________________
>
> >
>
> > Wikisource-l mailing list
>
> >
>
> > Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>
> >
>
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>
> >
>
> > _______________________________________________
>
> > Wikisource-l mailing list
>
> > Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Wikisource-l mailing list
>
> Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
>
>
>
>
> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikisource-l mailing list
> Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
>




_______________________________________________
Wikisource-l mailing list
Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l


_______________________________________________
Wikisource-l mailing list
Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l