ve a lot of
> > > wasted effort. Also a check against articles that have been deleted for
> > > good reasons, and articles in other languages with a reasonable
> accessible
> > > reference list.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -O
a reasonable accessible
> > reference list.
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > Behalf Of David Goodman
> > Sent: 12 March 2019 07:15
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing L
kimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of David Goodman
> Sent: 12 March 2019 07:15
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] How diverse are your readers?
>
> "with popular topics cannibalizing resources."
>
> What
Hoi,
I read the blogpost and it utterly misses the point. The point is that this
is NOT about English Wikipedia, for them another approach will work better.
At the same time when you read my blogpost, you will find that the elephant
in the room is that we consider articles to be synonymous with
Hey folks,
Trey authored a Wikimedia blog post on this as well:
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/12/12/failed-queries-fear-of-missing-out/
--Ed
On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 11:34 AM Dan Garry (Deskana)
wrote:
> The topic of zero-result search queries comes up from time to time. The
> logic is
I also don't see why it would be such a problem to have more articles about
Pokemon.
Volunteer effort is certainly not zero sum.
Contributing to one area doesn't necessarily mean contributing less to another.
Speaking from personal experience now, one of my earliest Wikipedia edits was
Hoi,
I have written another blogpost [1] where I express a different approach to
our data. It achieves two things
- an understanding what subjects not articles are most popular in
Wikipedia
- a tool that identifies what subjects we are looking for as missing in
any Wikipedia
the tool
I think, Benjamin, that sometimes some users don't get the experience of other
people. I met so many smart men and women with very trivial hobbies that the
idea of such separation sounds simply wrong or odd. I have never edited on
"pop" topic on purpose, I have no interest for cartoons or TV
I, for one, would indeed go so far as to say we should be doing editatons about
Naruto and Pokemon.
On Mar 12, 2019, at 10:10 AM, Paulo Santos Perneta
wrote:
> I would not go as far as saying we should be doing edithatons about Naruto
> and Pokemons,
Hi Gerard,
On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 2:26 PM Gerard Meijssen
wrote:
> but really
> why can we not have the data that allows us to seek out what people are
> actually looking for and do not find..
Please open a Phabricator task for this request at
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org . Please add
Ciao Ilario,
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 12:16 PM Ilario valdelli wrote:
>
> Any study is interesting, but if it could be country-based, it would be
> better.
We agree with you that the country component is quite important. There
is some ongoing engineering work to make the feature available in
Hi Vito,
I believe it depends on the way it is done. An edithaton on rappers & pop
stars with high-school students could be a great way to get them into the
project in a fun way. Then as they keep developing and diversifying their
interests, as generally happens with growing kids, they have a
Hi,
I absolutely agree with the idea of finding some way to know what is more
popular / wanted by readers. And if we identify with it/want to invest some
time in it / whatever, then we can have a good criteria to follow about
what to create first, or invest more in.
I have created myself a
Il giorno mar 12 mar 2019 alle ore 06:16 David Goodman
ha scritto:
> "with popular topics cannibalizing resources."
>
> What resources can be cannibalized? The limiting resource in WP is
> interested people writing, improving, and validating articles. People
> choose their own topics. This
I agree, we should not be deleting useful articles.
https://www.gwern.net/In-Defense-Of-Inclusionism
On Mar 11, 2019, at 4:52 AM, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
wrote:
> I know people in many fields with great technical expertise. people who
> published articles on Science and
Hoi,
The point is EXACTLY that this list will be different per language. What
there is, what is needed differs as a consequence. What specific Wikipedias
covers is as different.
There are multiple objectives to be gained:
- as we gain more articles, we will gain a bigger presence for a
Hoi,
You will not see me write about subjects I do not care about. So the notion
that anyone writing about subjects you care about is a fallacy. It takes
horses for courses, you will write about what you care about and so will I.
Others may look into what is missing and find that their subject
Bamyers99's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:POPULARLOWQUALITY
weekly list linked from the Community Portal "Help out" section
addresses the issue directly, thanks to ORES. It would be great if
that were adopted by the Foundation for Wikipedias other than English.
Also, the links from the numbers
Hoi,
What is it that scares youi? When you want to write about the subject that
you care about do. If it is popular good. That is all.
What scares me is that people define what others want to / need to know.
What is the propblem with providing what people are looking for? In the big
Wikipedias
...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
David Goodman
Sent: 12 March 2019 07:15
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] How diverse are your readers?
"with popular topics cannibalizing resources."
What resources can be cannibalized? The limiting resource in WP is
interes
"with popular topics cannibalizing resources."
What resources can be cannibalized? The limiting resource in WP is
interested people writing, improving, and validating articles. People
choose their own topics. This is different from an organization where
staff can be directed to work on what
We should be using a grid for what people are reading about, instead
of using countries. That will give a better representation of large
countries vs small countries. It will also better reflect local ethnic
groups.
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 1:53 PM Amir E. Aharoni
wrote:
>
> בתאריך יום א׳, 10
Hi Leila,
I have put my own but the problem we have in Switzerland is connected to
the multi-lingualism.
Italian, for instance, which is one big language in WIkipedia, is at the
opposite a minority in Switzerland.
Any study is interesting, but if it could be country-based, it would be
greatly affected by what other people choose to read?
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Vi to
> Sent: Monday, March 11, 2019 11:07 AM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: R
[mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Vi to
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2019 11:07 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] How diverse are your readers?
That's an unstable process on a long-term, with popular topics
cannibalizing resources. Top read articles are already about
is not. Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2019 1:53 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] How diverse are your readers?
I know people
Hi all,
This is a very interesting discussion. I'm going to fork this thread in the
next 2 hours (unless one of you do this in the meantime) for us to continue
the conversation around using search as a signal for improving Wikipedia in
there. It would be best, for current and future readability,
We can consider this an opportunity, e.g. popular media often touches on
diverse cultural and political themes, and international sports tournaments
give people a reason to learn about different countries. If people find our
project this way then so be it, we can just try and make sure those
Reminding is easy, it's analyzing that it's complex.
I suspect that editors and readers are probably a little bit smarter than
generally assumed. It's quite "obvious" that editors understand what is an
encyclopedia, after years. When I make an informal survey, statistically the
"smarter"
בתאריך יום א׳, 10 במרץ 2019 ב-23:27 מאת Gerard Meijssen <
gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>:
> Hoi,
> I have been thinking about it.. There is a place for research but really
> why can we not have the data that allows us to seek out what people are
> actually looking for and do not find.. Why
> The idea of a popularity-driven encyclopaedia scares
>
>
I agree, although I'd make it a bit more focused: an encyclopedia that is
*only* popularity-driven is indeed scary. It's good to mention this, and
not once, but repeatedly.
However, providing Wikipedia editors with information about
I know people in many fields with great technical expertise. people who
published articles on Science and Nature basically, and in the end I think they
are probably qualified to have an idea of what a good encyclopedia should be.
The point is that these people open wiki for topics far away
That's an unstable process on a long-term, with popular topics
cannibalizing resources. Top read articles are already about two or three
sports, some TV series and three or four music topics.
These are also the most popular topics among editors but if you'll start
focusing energies on these
The idea of an encyclopedia is to provide the information people need or
want that's appropriate to the format. It would be useful to see what they
want that is appropriate but we do not have -- and also useful to see what
they look for that isn't appropriate for us. Within what's appropriate, I
The idea of a popularity-driven encyclopaedia scares
Vito
Il giorno dom 10 mar 2019 alle ore 22:26 Gerard Meijssen <
gerard.meijs...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> Hoi,
> I have been thinking about it.. There is a place for research but really
> why can we not have the data that allows us to seek
Hoi,
I have been thinking about it.. There is a place for research but really
why can we not have the data that allows us to seek out what people are
actually looking for and do not find.. Why can we not promote what proves
to be of interest [1] ?
Thanks,
GerardM
[1]
36 matches
Mail list logo
