I'm skeptical that mass creation of species articles is a good idea, at
least until we have good integration with Wikidata. Such a bot would work
with database data, and database data belongs in a database. Who is going
to maintain millions of articles in a small Wikipedia when taxonomic
changes happen, errors in the underlying database are corrected, or new
information becomes available? On the English Wikipedia, we have enough of
a problem maintaining the articles Polbot generated; the problems will be
far worse on a smaller wiki that has fewer people qualified to work on
biological articles.
Wikipedias are better at providing textual, complex information that does
not fit well in a database. For database data, we should provide a bridge
to a database (e.g., Wikidata), not replicate database content in an
unmaintainable form.
2013/1/12 Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemowiki(a)gmail.com>
Andrew Leung, 13/01/2013 01:55:
Perhaps we should have a brainstorm session on how and where to recruit
these volunteer programmers?
If Anders is right, the code was made so that what you really have to
modify in order to run it is only the (probably small) linguistic content.
You could ask the bot owner some directions on what exactly needs to be
customised; when there's consensus and the community has "translated" what
needs translating, it's not hard to find someone to merely run a bot.
Nemo
______________________________**_________________
Wikispecies-l mailing list
Wikispecies-l(a)lists.wikimedia.**org <Wikispecies-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikispecies-l<https://lis…