Le lundi 6 juillet 2015, 15:50:21 Joe Sutherland a écrit : > It's kind of odd that there's no list anywhere already; I can't be the > first person to ask this! But that would be much appreciated Guillaume :)
So, I've got a preliminary list, but it looks like we might need to find a better way of identifying the creation date than the earliest timestamp, because it gives some weird results: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/P895 Here's an excerpt from the top of the list: 19700101000000: zhwikisource 20010115000000: arwiki 20010116200833: enwiki 20010116200833: nostalgiawiki 20010223175216: enwikibooks 20010308131402: elwiki 20010317014148: cawiki 20010402182741: dewiki BUT: * zhwikisource wasn't created in 1970 (or we've been lied to for a long time). * arwiki wasn't created before enwiki, and enwikibooks and elwiki weren't created before cawiki. * nostalgia wiki has exactly the same earliest timestamp as enwiki? Suspicious. * Some wikis don't return an earliest timestamp at all (?!), see bottom of the list. So there definitely are oddities; they're probably due to errors with timestamps, or servers losing time, etc. (see https://www.facebook.com/gpaumier/posts/10154157729588475 for a similar issue I recently discovered, and that Tim helped resolve). Therefore, revision timestamps are probably not a reliable way to determine the creation date of a wiki. As a wikiarchaeologist, I do find this kind of stuff incredibly interesting, though, so I'll look into it further during my Copious Free Time™, but likely after Wikimania. (I like the fact that I seem to have inadvertently discovered a way to identify all edits across wikis with an aberrant timestamp!) -- Guillaume Paumier _______________________________________________ Social-media mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
