[WikiEN-l] Featured churn

[Martijn Hoekstra]

On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 1:19 PM, Carcharoth <carcharothwp at googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 5:59 AM, Ian Woollard <ian.woollard at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 14/07/2009, Sage Ross <ragesoss+wikipedia at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 10:07 AM, Ian Woollard<ian.woollard at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's looking to me like 3.5 million is about the plateau, since the
>>>> curve is bang on that, but we might make 4 million *eventually*.
>>>>
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Modelling_Wikipedia%27s_growth#Logistic_model_for_growth_in_article_count_of_Wikipedia
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don't think the bell-shaped articles/day curve of the logistic model
>>> is a good description of the trends.  Since article creation peaked in
>>> 2007, the falloff in article creation has been much slower than than
>>> ramp-up.  Rather than falling back to close to zero articles/day over
>>> the next 5 years or so (as the logistic model predicts), it looks like
>>> we're heading to an asymptote of (I'm eyeballing it here) around 1000
>>> articles/day.  I expect 4 million articles a lot sooner than
>>> *eventually*.  ;)
>>
>> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Enwikipediagrowth.PNG
>>
>> We're already down to 1000/day growth on the unsmoothed graph as we
>> fall off one of the two biannual growth peaks.
>>
>> Looks like the Wikipedia is still bang-on for 3.5 million articles.
>
> As long as history doesn't come to an end, and new people keep getting
> born and (annoyingly) becoming notable enough for a Wikipedia article,
> there will always be a need for new articles.
>
> Carcharoth
>

There are even articles that were deleted without prejudice before,
that *gasp* happen to do gain notability! (I happened to look over my
own deletion logs yesterday, and a handfull of articles that were (IMO
correctly) deleted without prejudice in the past, that are now decent
articles).

Martijn