Hubertl, 18/06/2013 07:00:
Hi Johan, Anders Wennersten says:
And as shown earlier we have learned that this actually helps recruting
and keeping editors
???
It is difficult to draw conclusions about user behavior. The more
difficult it is to say something about the behavior of persons, which
I am happy to see that you, as well as Hubertl, is happy to go on as you
always have done. I do not have the ambition to change your view on
life, but to reach out to others open to the new opportunities that
automation gives us in better reahing our aim free knowledge for all
The base fact
Anders Wennersten, 18/06/2013 09:00:
I am happy to see that you, as well as Hubertl, is happy to go on as you
always have done. I do not have the ambition to change your view on
life, [...]
To clarify, my view on life didn't include any item about bot article
creation last time I checked.
I am a bit suprised about the lack of trying to understand and
develop mindsets here. I joined this mailing list the other day
in the belief that it was directed at discussing current topics
in the Wikimedia community in a constructive manner. So far I
have not found overwhelming proof of
Very good point. (Personally I think building a localised
Wikispecies – with the potential to grow – inside a
Wikipedia version is something good.)
Many thanks,
/Per
Wikipedia user Paracel63
2013-06-18, 14:50, skrev Gerard Meijssen:
Hear, hear
Thanks,
GerardM
Op 18 jun. 2013 12:08 schreef
Hi Per,
The discussions on this list can be heated, and not everyone is always
on their best behavior. All the caveats of debate on the Internet
apply, and any personality problems you might encounter on Wikimedia
projects occur on the lists as well. This is particularly so when, as
in this case,
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 3:00 AM, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se
wrote:
The base fact figures for sv:wp is
Increase of views +23% on yearly basis, WM:DE +3, WMF:Fr +8 (all mature
wikipediauser communities), nl with +14 and wm:it with +16 also very good
figures (Spain Russia, and
2013-06-18, 06:34, skrev Hubertl:
Loosing our original idea for which this project is donated by
thousands of donaters! From which you are paid for. As an
unpaid, long term Wikipedian in Residence I do know what I´m
talking about.
Hello!
I'm interested in knowing more of your experience
On 18 June 2013 16:53, David Cuenca dacu...@gmail.com wrote:
great to take advantage of the opportunity to monitor changes in the sv-wp
community as a result of this massive automated article creation.
For me it would be interesting to know:
[suggestions for metrics]
Otherwise the same
Many thanks for the resumé. I thought it would be like this, as
I've followed the development of the different wikipedias
(content and key factors) since 2008. BTW, is there a
(searchable) list archive?
Best of wishes,
/Per
2013-06-18, 17:29, skrev Nathan:
Hi Per,
The discussions on this
Per A.J. Andersson, 18/06/2013 18:05:
Many thanks for the resumé. I thought it would be like this, as I've
followed the development of the different wikipedias (content and key
factors) since 2008. BTW, is there a (searchable) list archive?
That would be very interesting and useful information
Cheers,
Peter (User:Pbsouthwood)
- Original Message -
From: David Cuenca dacu...@gmail.com
To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 5:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Swedish Wikipedia
On 16/06/13 15:24, Johan Jönsson wrote:
2013/6/16 Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com
I think that Anders is saying that the result of Wikimedia Swedish is due
to a work of bots and to a work of people.
It means that this result is contrary to the WMF strategy which would have
more people and
In the beginning there were a mass of article created manually that was
substandard and which today would not be accepted as proper articles
A little later (several year ago now) a mass of articles were
botgenerated that were substandard and could not be seen as proper
wp:articles
We have
, 2013 2:05 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Swedish Wikipedia reach 1 million (with supportof
bots)
I am totally supportive of the idea to create articles in this way if they
are more than a simple infobox with 5-6 stats in it. The bot generated
form
[1] of the millionth Swedish article
On 17.06.2013 12:36, Nikola Smolenski wrote:
On 16/06/13 15:24, Johan Jönsson wrote:
2013/6/16 Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com
I think that Anders is saying that the result of Wikimedia Swedish
is due
to a work of bots and to a work of people.
It means that this result is contrary to the
: Monday, June 17, 2013 2:05 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Swedish Wikipedia reach 1 million (with
supportof bots)
I am totally supportive of the idea to create articles in this way if they
are more than a simple infobox with 5-6 stats in it. The bot generated
form
[1] of the millionth Swedish
To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 2:05 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Swedish Wikipedia reach 1 million (with
supportof bots)
I am totally supportive of the idea to create articles in this way
The use of wikidata instead of a bot is a good practice to provude good
contant to all wikipedias because larger communities can control and fix
errors instead of providing content by a bot and keep it outdated.
Il giorno 17/giu/2013 15:53, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
ha scritto:
We just published a blog post from Lennart Guldbransson on the Wikimedia
blog about this milestone:
http://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/06/17/swedish-wikipedia-1-million-articles/
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 7:12 AM, Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote:
The use of wikidata instead of a bot is a
Hubertl, your e-mail was rude, even if you did not mean it to be. Please
remember hundreds of people read every e-mail sent to this list, and
civility is expected.
Thanks,
Asaf
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Per A.J. Andersson p...@telia.com wrote:
Hi!
Nice to know German language
Hi Asaf, did you read my mail or is this an automated answer because of
using the word monkey? Or is this a just a try like an official muzzle?
Really rude for me is, when some Wikipedians think, they have to start
a professional service company for transporting simple facts without
efforts
Hi Anders, you wrote:
And as shown earlier we have learned that this actually
helps recruting and keeping editors
Do you have any prove for that or is this just a speculation or your
personal wishes? Does this mean that the Swedish community precisely
because this botwork has - against the
Am 16.06.2013 15:24, schrieb Johan Jönsson:
I would say our experience is that it doesn't affect the number of human
editors at all in any way.
Hi Johan, Anders Wennersten says:
And as shown earlier we have learned that this actually helps recruting
and keeping editors
???
It is
Congratulations to the swedish wikipedians!
2013/6/16 Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se:
Yesterday sv:wp reached 1 M articles. The one who did the passing was a bot
generated article of a butterfly
http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erysichton_elaborata.
The bot behind this article is
Congratulations!!!
Tonmoy
On Jun 16, 2013 6:30 PM, Patricio Lorente patricio.lore...@gmail.com
wrote:
Congratulations to the swedish wikipedians!
2013/6/16 Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se:
Yesterday sv:wp reached 1 M articles. The one who did the passing was a
bot
generated
Well, precisely to the bots. But we can congratulate the Swedish
Wikipedians on more than 500k manually created articles:
http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/BotActivityMatrixCreates.htm
Best regards
Martin
2013/6/16 Patricio Lorente patricio.lore...@gmail.com
Congratulations to the swedish
grattis mina kompisar!
*Jag känner en bott, hon heter Lsjbot, Lsjbot heter hon...*
It looks like Polish will be the next to hit the symbolic number:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias#100_000.2B_articles
wittylama.com
Peace, love metadata
On 16 June 2013 22:39, Tonmoy Khan
Congratulations swedish wikipedians
*Nurunnaby Chowdhury Hasive*
Bangladesh Ambassador | Open Knowledge Network Foundation
(OKFN)http://www.okfn.org
Auto-confirmed, Reviewer Roll backer Editor | Bangla
Wikipediahttp://bn.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:nhasive
Treasurer Coordinator (PR) |
I think that Anders is saying that the result of Wikimedia Swedish is
due to a work of bots and to a work of people.
It means that this result is contrary to the WMF strategy which would
have more people and more contributors.
The next millions of articles will be reached by Polish Wikipedia
Impressive numbers. Congrats.
Can we have those species stubs and lakes in English Wikipedia?
2013/6/16 Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se
Yesterday sv:wp reached 1 M articles. The one who did the passing was a
bot generated article of a butterfly http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/**
2013/6/16 Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com
I think that Anders is saying that the result of Wikimedia Swedish is due
to a work of bots and to a work of people.
It means that this result is contrary to the WMF strategy which would have
more people and more contributors.
The next millions
I meant we should give credit to the extremely clever PEOPLE behind the
bots. And stop handling proper bot generated article as second class.
Their data is actually better verified then most of the others
And what we find is that the bots cannot build knowledge (which is our
aim) without the
Article count milestones are nice!
However, I remind those who were distracted in 2008 that article count
is a largely irrelevant piece of our statistics since 2008; both
stats.wikimedia.org and www.wikipedia.org (plus the other project
portals) don't use it at all to rank projects, etc.
Milestones are nice. They're one big reason for celebrating,
once in a while. There are lots of others, but not all are this
definable and publicly palatable. Quality projects of various
kinds are ongoing all the time, and we need different kinds of
carrots to keep up the community interest at
35 matches
Mail list logo
