On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 8:46 AM, Daniel Kinzler daniel@brightbyte.de wrote:
Andrew Garrett schrieb:
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 9:34 AM, O. O. olson_ot@yahoo.com wrote:
Andrew Garrett wrote:
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 9:26 AM, O. O. olson_ot@yahoo.com wrote:
The above link says that “only articles” and no redirects are in the namespace NS0. Also Talk: pages are not included in the NS0. Then, when the current English Wikipedia advertises 2,791,033 Articles, I cannot understand why the list of Titles contains 5716820 Titles? This is a little more than double?
The larger number includes redirects, the smaller number doesn't.
Then why does this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:NS0 say that “Redirects” are not considered as Articles and hence are not in NS0?
It doesn't say that, it says "Not all pages in the article namespace are considered to be articles", listing redirects as an example.
The terminology is indeed confusing. ns0 is the "main" namespace, which is used for "articles". But it also contains redirects. For the statistics, the software tries to count "real" or "good" articles, which is defined to be in ns0, not a redirect, and containing at least one link. It may in the future even be redefined not to include disambiguation pages. The title list however contains all pages in ns0.
Talk pages are in their own namesapace, or rather, namespaces. Namespaces come in pairs: the namespace itself (even id), and the corresponding talk namespace (odd id).
plotting number of articles could help a observer "see" the grown of a wiki, but is a bad number to see the "dead" of a wiki.
but.. he!.. maybe all wikis on the mediawiki proyect are just growing, so we don't have this phenomenon just now, maybe in a few years we will see some "wastelands wikis". Immense amounts of text that no one can maintain (are interested in maintain) and let on his own suffer a continuous degradation. Anyway all our wikis are on his infancy, and I am thinking 5+ years forward, and there are lots and lots of urgent problems just now.
please ignore this email