Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Thomas Dalton]

2009/4/22 Andrew Gray :
> 2009/4/22 Thomas Dalton :
>> 2009/4/22 Andrew Gray :
>>> So this would suggest that zhwp, at a very rough estimate, gets about
>>> 0.5% to 0.25% of the traffic that enwp does.
>>
>> And Alexa says it gets 1.1% of Wikipedia traffic and enwiki gets
>> 54.0%. That means zhwiki gets 0.02% the traffic of enwiki. So the two
>> measures get similar results.
>
> 2%, surely?

Yes. And neither 2% or 0.02% are particularly similar to 0.25-0.5%, so
let's just pretend I never sent that email...

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Andrew Gray]

2009/4/22 Thomas Dalton :
> 2009/4/22 Andrew Gray :
>> So this would suggest that zhwp, at a very rough estimate, gets about
>> 0.5% to 0.25% of the traffic that enwp does.
>
> And Alexa says it gets 1.1% of Wikipedia traffic and enwiki gets
> 54.0%. That means zhwiki gets 0.02% the traffic of enwiki. So the two
> measures get similar results.

2%, surely?

Anyway, I decided to see what this looks like for all wikis. I've done
this for the top ten, which accounting to Alexa get 92.1% of our
traffic - en, ja, de, es, ru, fr, it, pl, pt, zh, in that order.

It's quite interesting - Chinese is a drastic outlier, but we have
broad disagreements for some languages and not others. After a bit of
normalising, the Alexa traffic share versus the "main page" traffic
share comes out as roughly the same for English, German and Russian.

For Japanese and Spanish, the Alexa traffic share is about a third
higher than the main-page traffic would suggest; for Chinese, it's
four times higher.

For French, the Alexa traffic share is about 20% under what my metric
suggests; Portuguese, 30% under; Polish, 50% under; and Italian, 60%
under.

There's two interpretations here:

a) Main page traffic is not a consistent pattern across all
Wikipedias; some drive a far higher fraction of their visitors through
the front page than others.

b) Alexa has some statistical mis-scaling going on for some languages.

I'll see if I can scare up some better figures - but whichever answer
we use, there's certainly something odd about zhwp!

-- 
- Andrew Gray
  andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Thomas Dalton]

2009/4/22 Andrew Gray :
> So this would suggest that zhwp, at a very rough estimate, gets about
> 0.5% to 0.25% of the traffic that enwp does.

And Alexa says it gets 1.1% of Wikipedia traffic and enwiki gets
54.0%. That means zhwiki gets 0.02% the traffic of enwiki. So the two
measures get similar results.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Andrew Gray]

2009/4/22 Ray Saintonge :

>> Been around for a while. I was expecting it to overtake en this year
>> but not this soon. Would be interesting to know how they beat out
>> Baidu Baike.
>
> It's not surprising that a gang of unilingual Anglos wouldn't notice a
> Chinese language development.

Something that is currently causing me a great deal of amusement: our
article at [[Hudong]] was created in April 2008 (when it had 2.4m
articles).

There was an earlier article at [[Hoodong]], created in November 2007
(when it had a mere 1.5 million articles) ... and deleted the same day
as everyone's favourite, CSD A7. ("...about a web site that does not
assert significance") It seems after that, no-one got around to
recreating it for six months.

Ooops.

-- 
- Andrew Gray
  andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Andrew Gray]

2009/4/21 Thomas Dalton :
> 2009/4/21 Ian Woollard :
>> Presumably the wikipedia can find out what proportion of its traffic
>> actually comes from China, and compare that with the Alexa statistics.
>> If they're close then it gives some evidence that Alexa have enough
>> toolbars out in the wild in China to give reasonable accuracy.
>
> Yes, that would work. Or, perhaps more easily, we could compare the
> page views per subdomain with the percentages given by Alexa. Are
> those numbers available anywhere?

I don't think there's a handy figure available, but you could probably
get a quick-and-dirty first-order comparison using the viewing figures
for a single high-profile target like the frontpage. Using this
metric, hmm:

en.wp [[Main Page]] - 192870187 in March
en.wp [[Special:Search]] - 474835986 in March

zh.wp [[Wikipedia:首页]] - 925156 in March
zh.wp [[Special:Search]] - 1254441 in March

ratio of pageviews for the main page, ~ 210:1 in favour of enwp; for
search, 380:1 in favour of enwp.

So this would suggest that zhwp, at a very rough estimate, gets about
0.5% to 0.25% of the traffic that enwp does.

-- 
- Andrew Gray
  andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Jussi-Ville Heiskanen]

Thomas Dalton wrote:
> 2009/4/22 Ray Saintonge :
>   
>> Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> 
>>> 2009/4/22 Ray Saintonge:
>>>
>>>   
>>> That's not entirely true. Very few people's livelihoods depends on it,
>>> but we do have some paid staff.
>>>   
>> I'm glad to see you took the bait. :-)
>>
>> Does the paid staff exist to support the volunteer project, or is it the
>> other way around?  When essentially volunteer organizations feel obliged
>> to protect the jobs of their paid staff by promoting monopolistic
>> practices they become anti-competitive.  It's difficult to know when the
>> line is crossed.
>> 
>
> Of course it is that way around, no one would question that. If the
> paid staff are no longer required to achieve our goals then they will
> be made redundant, but that doesn't mean those staff aren't dependent
> on their jobs for their livelihoods (hopefully they wouldn't have too
> much difficultly finding new jobs, though).
>   

I am sure that if Larry Sanger is reading this mailing list, you
just made him wince.


Yours,

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen


___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Thomas Dalton]

2009/4/22 Ray Saintonge :
> Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> 2009/4/22 Ray Saintonge:
>>
>>> I wouldn't be too concerned about it either. This is a volunteer project
>>> so, unlike with the folks at EB, nobody's livelihood depends on it.
>>>
>> That's not entirely true. Very few people's livelihoods depends on it,
>> but we do have some paid staff.
>
> I'm glad to see you took the bait. :-)
>
> Does the paid staff exist to support the volunteer project, or is it the
> other way around?  When essentially volunteer organizations feel obliged
> to protect the jobs of their paid staff by promoting monopolistic
> practices they become anti-competitive.  It's difficult to know when the
> line is crossed.

Of course it is that way around, no one would question that. If the
paid staff are no longer required to achieve our goals then they will
be made redundant, but that doesn't mean those staff aren't dependent
on their jobs for their livelihoods (hopefully they wouldn't have too
much difficultly finding new jobs, though).

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Ray Saintonge]

Thomas Dalton wrote:
> 2009/4/22 Ray Saintonge:
>   
>> I wouldn't be too concerned about it either. This is a volunteer project
>> so, unlike with the folks at EB, nobody's livelihood depends on it.
>> 
> That's not entirely true. Very few people's livelihoods depends on it,
> but we do have some paid staff.

I'm glad to see you took the bait. :-)

Does the paid staff exist to support the volunteer project, or is it the 
other way around?  When essentially volunteer organizations feel obliged 
to protect the jobs of their paid staff by promoting monopolistic 
practices they become anti-competitive.  It's difficult to know when the 
line is crossed.

Ec

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Ray Saintonge]

geni wrote:
> 2009/4/21 Nathan:
>   
>> Exactly what I thought. Better integration and support for wikiprojects
>> (have to say, I sort of prefer "task groups" as a name...), better
>> recognition on the wiki of top contributors to various articles -- those are
>> things we could really learn from.
>> 
> Historically wikiprojects getting hold of too much power or thinking
> they have has tended to cause problems.
>   

Not really.  It is just as valid to say that centralized policies and 
"guidelines" hinder the development of wikiprojects, and that there is 
too much power at the centre.   This is a traditional problem in 
countries that must share powers between federal and state authority. 
Nathan's point about better integration and support is well taken, even 
if I don't feel as strongly about the recognition.

The renaming of "wikiprojects" to clarify the distinction between these 
and "sister projects" has crossed my mind before, though my suggested 
name would be "study groups".
>> And if we could approach the proprietor,
>> and encourage a more compatible licensing scheme, our Chinese language
>> projects could really benefit (and their project could benefit from
>> Wikimedia content).
>> 
> I suspect they already take it.
>   

Of course!  Licensing schemes that stress the letter of the licences 
rather than a series of underlying principles don't make this any easier.

>> Did this thing just appear out of nowhere? Suddenly a collaborative online
>> reference site larger than the English Wikipedia?
>> 
> Been around for a while. I was expecting it to overtake en this year
> but not this soon. Would be interesting to know how they beat out
> Baidu Baike.
>
>
>   
It's not surprising that a gang of unilingual Anglos wouldn't notice a 
Chinese language development.

Ec


___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Thomas Dalton]

2009/4/22 Ray Saintonge :
> I wouldn't be too concerned about it either. This is a volunteer project
> so, unlike with the folks at EB, nobody's livelihood depends on it.

That's not entirely true. Very few people's livelihoods depends on it,
but we do have some paid staff.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Ray Saintonge]

Ian Woollard wrote:
> On 21/04/2009, Scientia Potentia est wrote:
>   
>> I'm not too concerned. Their notability standards seem to be very loose, and
>> they have few of the trappings that we emphasize: BLP, neutrality, reliable
>> sourcing, brilliant prose, etc.
>> 
> That's exactly the kind of thing that the Encyclopedia Britannica said
> about the Wikipedia!
>
>   
I wouldn't be too concerned about it either. This is a volunteer project 
so, unlike with the folks at EB, nobody's livelihood depends on it.  
Competition is a healthy development, and to everyone's benefit.  Free 
culture principles should be the one unifying criterion for all these 
sites. In a free culture environment all such projects should be free to 
borrow from each other.  The others would certainly not be bound by NPOV 
or the other listed features, but the right and ability of readers to 
compare different sites allows them the opportunity to determine for 
themselves exactly what is neutral.


Ec

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Casey Brown]

On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM, David Gerard  wrote:
> (We're #4 on comScore because comScore aggregates different sites from
> the same company, but Alexa does it strictly by domain name, e.g.
> listing Google and YouTube separately.)

For those interested in our comScore standings, check out this page:


-- 
Casey Brown
Cbrown1023

---
Note:  This e-mail address is used for mailing lists.  Personal emails sent to
this address will probably get lost.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Thomas Dalton]

2009/4/21 Ian Woollard :
> Presumably the wikipedia can find out what proportion of its traffic
> actually comes from China, and compare that with the Alexa statistics.
> If they're close then it gives some evidence that Alexa have enough
> toolbars out in the wild in China to give reasonable accuracy.

Yes, that would work. Or, perhaps more easily, we could compare the
page views per subdomain with the percentages given by Alexa. Are
those numbers available anywhere?

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Ian Woollard]

Presumably the wikipedia can find out what proportion of its traffic
actually comes from China, and compare that with the Alexa statistics.
If they're close then it gives some evidence that Alexa have enough
toolbars out in the wild in China to give reasonable accuracy.


On 21/04/2009, David Gerard  wrote:
> 2009/4/21 Thomas Dalton :
>> 2009/4/21 Ian Woollard :
>
>>> So far as I can tell from percentage breakdowns by country in Alexa,
>>> the Chinese go to hudong and zh.wikipedia.org equally often- virtually
>>> the same number of page hits. However, hudong ranks 112 and
>>> wikipedia.org ranks 66 in China, which tells you that a lot of people
>>> are reading the other languages more than Chinese.
>
>> I seriously doubt that Alexa rankings at all meaningful for Chinese
>> page views. I'm not sure if it is still the case, but I seem to recall
>> that at some point the Alexa toolbar was only available in English,
>> that would explain why wikipedia.org does better - people that don't
>> speak good English are more likely to use the Chinese sites and less
>> likely to use the Alexa toolbar.
>
>
> Alexa is a rough guide only - their userbase (I heard it was ~70,000
> somewhere, but don't recall where - I see no number in the Wikipedia
> article) is large enough to provide a statistical sample, but has all
> sorts of obvious systemic biases in the sampling (IE-only,
> English-only, etc).
>
> So we're #7 on Alexa, which indicates we're popular, but not a whole lot
> more!
>
> (We're #4 on comScore because comScore aggregates different sites from
> the same company, but Alexa does it strictly by domain name, e.g.
> listing Google and YouTube separately.)
>
>
> - d.
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


-- 
-Ian Woollard

We live in an imperfectly imperfect world. Life in a perfectly
imperfect world would be *much* better. Life in an imperfectly perfect
world would be pretty ghastly though.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[David Gerard]

2009/4/21 Thomas Dalton :
> 2009/4/21 Ian Woollard :

>> So far as I can tell from percentage breakdowns by country in Alexa,
>> the Chinese go to hudong and zh.wikipedia.org equally often- virtually
>> the same number of page hits. However, hudong ranks 112 and
>> wikipedia.org ranks 66 in China, which tells you that a lot of people
>> are reading the other languages more than Chinese.

> I seriously doubt that Alexa rankings at all meaningful for Chinese
> page views. I'm not sure if it is still the case, but I seem to recall
> that at some point the Alexa toolbar was only available in English,
> that would explain why wikipedia.org does better - people that don't
> speak good English are more likely to use the Chinese sites and less
> likely to use the Alexa toolbar.


Alexa is a rough guide only - their userbase (I heard it was ~70,000
somewhere, but don't recall where - I see no number in the Wikipedia
article) is large enough to provide a statistical sample, but has all
sorts of obvious systemic biases in the sampling (IE-only,
English-only, etc).

So we're #7 on Alexa, which indicates we're popular, but not a whole lot more!

(We're #4 on comScore because comScore aggregates different sites from
the same company, but Alexa does it strictly by domain name, e.g.
listing Google and YouTube separately.)


- d.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Thomas Dalton]

2009/4/21 Ian Woollard :
> So far as I can tell from percentage breakdowns by country in Alexa,
> the Chinese go to hudong and zh.wikipedia.org equally often- virtually
> the same number of page hits. However, hudong ranks 112 and
> wikipedia.org ranks 66 in China, which tells you that a lot of people
> are reading the other languages more than Chinese.

I seriously doubt that Alexa rankings at all meaningful for Chinese
page views. I'm not sure if it is still the case, but I seem to recall
that at some point the Alexa toolbar was only available in English,
that would explain why wikipedia.org does better - people that don't
speak good English are more likely to use the Chinese sites and less
likely to use the Alexa toolbar.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Ian Woollard]

So far as I can tell from percentage breakdowns by country in Alexa,
the Chinese go to hudong and zh.wikipedia.org equally often- virtually
the same number of page hits. However, hudong ranks 112 and
wikipedia.org ranks 66 in China, which tells you that a lot of people
are reading the other languages more than Chinese.

On 21/04/2009, geni  wrote:
> 2009/4/21 Scientia Potentia est :
>> I'm not too concerned. Their notability standards seem to be very loose,
>> and they have >few of the trappings that we emphasize: BLP, neutrality,
>> reliable sourcing, brilliant prose, >etc. The software is also much more
>> focused on social networking. Furthermore, Hudong >is not free.
>>
>
> Apart from the neutrality our readers and most of our writers tend not
> to care about that. The integration with a degree of social networking
> tools is also interesting They have a forum linked off their main page
> among other things.
>
> --
> geni
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


-- 
-Ian Woollard

We live in an imperfectly imperfect world. Life in a perfectly
imperfect world would be *much* better. Life in an imperfectly perfect
world would be pretty ghastly though.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[geni]

2009/4/21 Scientia Potentia est :
> I'm not too concerned. Their notability standards seem to be very loose, and 
> they have >few of the trappings that we emphasize: BLP, neutrality, reliable 
> sourcing, brilliant prose, >etc. The software is also much more focused on 
> social networking. Furthermore, Hudong >is not free.
>

Apart from the neutrality our readers and most of our writers tend not
to care about that. The integration with a degree of social networking
tools is also interesting They have a forum linked off their main page
among other things.

-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[geni]

2009/4/21 Nathan :
> Exactly what I thought. Better integration and support for wikiprojects
> (have to say, I sort of prefer "task groups" as a name...), better
> recognition on the wiki of top contributors to various articles -- those are
> things we could really learn from.

Historically wikiprojects getting hold of too much power or thinking
they have has tended to cause problems.

> And if we could approach the proprietor,
> and encourage a more compatible licensing scheme, our Chinese language
> projects could really benefit (and their project could benefit from
> Wikimedia content).

I suspect they already take it.


> Did this thing just appear out of nowhere? Suddenly a collaborative online
> reference site larger than the English Wikipedia?

Been around for a while. I was expecting it to overtake en this year
but not this soon. Would be interesting to know how they beat out
Baidu Baike.


-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Thomas Dalton]

2009/4/21 Nathan :
> Exactly what I thought. Better integration and support for wikiprojects
> (have to say, I sort of prefer "task groups" as a name...), better
> recognition on the wiki of top contributors to various articles -- those are
> things we could really learn from. And if we could approach the proprietor,
> and encourage a more compatible licensing scheme, our Chinese language
> projects could really benefit (and their project could benefit from
> Wikimedia content).
>
> Did this thing just appear out of nowhere? Suddenly a collaborative online
> reference site larger than the English Wikipedia?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hudong

It was founded in 2005, apparently. The "Censorship and controversy"
section of that article makes me question whether we want to get too
involved with it. Their values seem to be significantly different to
ours.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Sherool]

On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 16:13:46 +0200, Nathan  wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 7:51 AM, Ian Woollard  
> wrote:
>
>> On 21/04/2009, Scientia Potentia est  wrote:
>> > I'm not too concerned. Their notability standards seem to be very  
>> loose,
>> and
>> > they have few of the trappings that we emphasize: BLP, neutrality,
>> reliable
>> > sourcing, brilliant prose, etc.
>>
>> That's exactly the kind of thing that the Encyclopedia Britannica said
>> about the Wikipedia!
>>
>> --
>> -Ian Woollard
>>
>
> Exactly what I thought. Better integration and support for wikiprojects
> (have to say, I sort of prefer "task groups" as a name...), better
> recognition on the wiki of top contributors to various articles -- those  
> are
> things we could really learn from. And if we could approach the  
> proprietor,
> and encourage a more compatible licensing scheme, our Chinese language
> projects could really benefit (and their project could benefit from
> Wikimedia content).
>
> Did this thing just appear out of nowhere? Suddenly a collaborative  
> online
> reference site larger than the English Wikipedia?

Well they have been around for 2-3 years. I'm a bit fuzzy on the details I  
have to admit. I'm under the impression that it came about as a  
"replacement" for the Chinese Wikipedia since the Chinese government kept  
blocking access to it because it didn't conform to the party line when it  
came to scertain aspects of history and political borders (Taiwan etc.).

Although looking at our articles I might be thinking of [[Baidu Baike]],  
wich "only" have about 1,5 million articles aparently despite operating  
for about a year longer than [[Hudong]].



-- 
[[:en:User:Sherool]]

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Nathan]

On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 7:51 AM, Ian Woollard wrote:

> On 21/04/2009, Scientia Potentia est  wrote:
> > I'm not too concerned. Their notability standards seem to be very loose,
> and
> > they have few of the trappings that we emphasize: BLP, neutrality,
> reliable
> > sourcing, brilliant prose, etc.
>
> That's exactly the kind of thing that the Encyclopedia Britannica said
> about the Wikipedia!
>
> --
> -Ian Woollard
>

Exactly what I thought. Better integration and support for wikiprojects
(have to say, I sort of prefer "task groups" as a name...), better
recognition on the wiki of top contributors to various articles -- those are
things we could really learn from. And if we could approach the proprietor,
and encourage a more compatible licensing scheme, our Chinese language
projects could really benefit (and their project could benefit from
Wikimedia content).

Did this thing just appear out of nowhere? Suddenly a collaborative online
reference site larger than the English Wikipedia?

Nathan
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Thomas Dalton]

2009/4/21 Carcharoth :
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Apoc 2400  wrote:
>> It seems the moderator ate the text of my message.
>
> It got through to me first time.

Ditto.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Carcharoth]

On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Apoc 2400  wrote:
> It seems the moderator ate the text of my message.

It got through to me first time.

Carcharoth

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Apoc 2400]

It seems the moderator ate the text of my message.

>From my limited checking, most of the text and images on Hudong seems
to be copied from other websites: news sites, government sites, the
official site of the subject, etc.

They have managed to make an interesting user interface though, a
working WYSIWYG wiki.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Ian Woollard]

On 21/04/2009, Scientia Potentia est  wrote:
> I'm not too concerned. Their notability standards seem to be very loose, and
> they have few of the trappings that we emphasize: BLP, neutrality, reliable
> sourcing, brilliant prose, etc.

That's exactly the kind of thing that the Encyclopedia Britannica said
about the Wikipedia!

-- 
-Ian Woollard

We live in an imperfectly imperfect world. Life in a perfectly
imperfect world would be *much* better. Life in an imperfectly perfect
world would be pretty ghastly though.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Apoc 2400]

From my limited checking, most of the text and images on Hudong seems
to be copied from other websites: news sites, government sites, the
official site of the subject, etc.

They have managed to make an interesting user interface though, a
working WYSIWYG wiki.

2009/4/21 Ian Woollard :
> Yeah:
>
> "total of 3,050,203 entries, 3,270,000,000 words."
>
> If the translation service I just used is giving me an accurate feel,
> it seems a bit more facile than the wikipedia right now, and even less
> well referenced and less accurate. But it's got more articles, and
> it's still pretty new.
>
> The Alexa traffic rank is a 'healthy' 281,588 though ;-) but I don't
> know how accurate Alexa would be for a chinese site though, it's
> possible Alexa isn't used much in China which would skew the
> statistics.
>
> On 20/04/2009, geni  wrote:
>> Hudong.com is now bigger than us:
>>
>> http://www.jlmpacificepoch.com/newsstories?id=139049_0_5_0_M
>>
>> In fact they may have broken 3 million but I can't read
>>
>> 全球最大中文百科由全球1,016,360位网民共同编写而成。共计3,050,203词条，32.7亿文字
>>
>> and I'm not totally certain their definition of article is the same as
>> ours. Still I think we need to get a clearer idea of what is going on
>> at Hudong.
>>
>> --
>> geni
>>
>> ___
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>
>
> --
> -Ian Woollard
>
> We live in an imperfectly imperfect world. Life in a perfectly
> imperfect world would be *much* better. Life in an imperfectly perfect
> world would be pretty ghastly though.
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Scientia Potentia est]

I'm not too concerned. Their notability standards seem to be very loose, and 
they have few of the trappings that we emphasize: BLP, neutrality, reliable 
sourcing, brilliant prose, etc. The software is also much more focused on 
social networking. Furthermore, Hudong is not free.

I also wonder what fluff they have marked as "articles," because their category 
on wildlife is quite threadbare: 
http://www.hudong.com/categoryalldocs/%E8%87%AA%E7%84%B6%E7%94%9F%E7%89%A9/

--- On Mon, 4/20/09, geni  wrote:
From: geni 
Subject: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.
To: "English Wikipedia" 
Date: Monday, April 20, 2009, 2:51 PM

Hudong.com is now bigger than us:

http://www.jlmpacificepoch.com/newsstories?id=139049_0_5_0_M

In fact they may have broken 3 million but I can't read

全球最大中文百科由全球1,016,360位网民共同编写而成。共计3,050,203词条，32.7亿文字

and I'm not totally certain their definition of article is the same as
ours. Still I think we need to get a clearer idea of what is going on
at Hudong.

-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l



  
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Sherool]

On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 23:51:59 +0200, geni  wrote:

> Hudong.com is now bigger than us:
>
> http://www.jlmpacificepoch.com/newsstories?id=139049_0_5_0_M
>
> In fact they may have broken 3 million but I can't read
>
> 全球最大中文百科由全球1,016,360位网民共同编写而成。共计3,050,203词条，32.7亿文字
>
> and I'm not totally certain their definition of article is the same as
> ours. Still I think we need to get a clearer idea of what is going on
> at Hudong.

Well my first impression afer clicking around for a while (via Google  
translate) is that it's mostly like Wikipedia with all the rules thrown  
out (wich I'm sure a lot of people might find appealing)... There seems to  
be very little emphasis on things like reliable sources (or even any  
sources in many cases), a lot of celebretry bios seems to play up various  
"sex scandals" reported only by fridge sensation rags and such, and have  
lenghty sections about likes and dislikes, pets and all sorts of cruft  
like that.

The copyright policy (or lack thereof) also seems to basicaly be that the  
site itself claim copyrihgt over all user contributions (although top  
contributors are publicly "credited" right on sidebar of the article, wich  
I guess is an easier way to make people feel appreciated than trying to  
explain to them how a free license works) and the image pages simply  
contain a disclaimer saying the image was submited by a user and may be  
copyrighted (wich to be fair is better than most sites manage). They are  
clearly not clamouring to be part of the free content movement that's for  
sure.

Some of the organization of contnet is interesting, articles appear to be  
organized under various "task groups" that seem to be their version of a  
"Wikiproject" but it's much more integrated in the software, giving stats  
about number of articles under the task, how complete it is, number of  
users who particupate and stuff like that. Some users also seems to be  
officialy designated as "experts" on various topics (wich may or may not  
be a good idea depending on how the acrediting works).

Hardly an in depth look and I'm sure there are tonnes of more insightfull  
stuff written about the site out there, just some personal observations  
after clicking around for 20 minutes trying to make sense of the machine  
translated text.


-- 
[[:en:User:Sherool]]

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Ian Woollard]

Yeah:

"total of 3,050,203 entries, 3,270,000,000 words."

If the translation service I just used is giving me an accurate feel,
it seems a bit more facile than the wikipedia right now, and even less
well referenced and less accurate. But it's got more articles, and
it's still pretty new.

The Alexa traffic rank is a 'healthy' 281,588 though ;-) but I don't
know how accurate Alexa would be for a chinese site though, it's
possible Alexa isn't used much in China which would skew the
statistics.

On 20/04/2009, geni  wrote:
> Hudong.com is now bigger than us:
>
> http://www.jlmpacificepoch.com/newsstories?id=139049_0_5_0_M
>
> In fact they may have broken 3 million but I can't read
>
> 全球最大中文百科由全球1,016,360位网民共同编写而成。共计3,050,203词条，32.7亿文字
>
> and I'm not totally certain their definition of article is the same as
> ours. Still I think we need to get a clearer idea of what is going on
> at Hudong.
>
> --
> geni
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


-- 
-Ian Woollard

We live in an imperfectly imperfect world. Life in a perfectly
imperfect world would be *much* better. Life in an imperfectly perfect
world would be pretty ghastly though.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[geni]

Hudong.com is now bigger than us:

http://www.jlmpacificepoch.com/newsstories?id=139049_0_5_0_M

In fact they may have broken 3 million but I can't read

全球最大中文百科由全球1,016,360位网民共同编写而成。共计3,050,203词条，32.7亿文字

and I'm not totally certain their definition of article is the same as
ours. Still I think we need to get a clearer idea of what is going on
at Hudong.

-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l