Hoi,

Please consider .... there are over 280 Wikipedias in as many languages. In
many languages we have few articles. Providing information is our mission.
We aim to provide well written articles. The argument is that we do not
succeed at that. Actually it is not an argument, it is a fact. When the
Germans feel they do not need bot generated articles, more power to them,
when they assume that their example is to be copied I truly wonder if they
understand the lack of resources in so many languages.

It is fairly easy to find articles that are considered relevant to a
sizable group of the German populace that are missing.. I am working
towards providing this information by using Wikidata. The best part (for
the Germans) is that I urge them to make sure that these articles exist and
are well written .. in German.
Thanks,
     GerardM

PS I blogged about how this can be done several times in the past


On 17 June 2013 15:43, Dimce Grozdanoski <dimce.grozdano...@gmail.com>wrote:

> 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 WMF strategy which would
>>>> have
>>>> more people and more contributors.
>>>>
>>>> The next millions of articles will be reached by Polish Wikipedia but
>>>> also
>>>> by cebuan Wikipedia and by Warai-Warai Wikipedia.
>>>>
>>>> May be it's the time to have only bots to write in Wikipedia? I hope
>>>> that
>>>> in future the number of articles will be counted considering at least a
>>>> small content ad not only a template in a page, because the use like
>>>> this
>>>> will discourage the communities of editors.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I would say our experience is that it doesn't affect the number of human
>>> editors at all in any way. A couple of people run bots that create very
>>> short articles about taxons or other stuff that, to be honest, probably
>>> wouldn't have been created otherwise. These articles have very few
>>> readers.
>>> Why on Earth would this discourage us?
>>>
>>> Our main problem is that browsing Swedish Wikipedia using the "random
>>> article" button isn't as fun as it used to be. That's probably fixable.
>>>
>>
>> I am again using the opportunity to remind that all of this will soon be
>> completely unnecessary since it should be possible to generate the articles
>> on the fly from Wikidata data.
>>
>>  you mean to generate on the fly only articles of this kind, not any
> article.
>
>  ______________________________**_________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org <Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
>> Unsubscribe: 
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
>>
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org <Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> Unsubscribe: 
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Reply via email to