As a patroller on my homewiki I can say that 15 of the 50 most active editors according to stats.wikimedia.org would be capable of answering the questions in one of the ten languages. Those are the people who translate articles from the ten languages of the survey (13 from English, 2 from Russian). Ask a few more patrollers from other communities, multiply by the number of very active editors on those wikis and divide by the number of asked patrollers :). It is not impossible to get a rough estimate.
Best regards, User:Lord Bumbury / Nikola Kalchev Wikimedians of Bulgaria, a Wikimedia CEE Spring international organiser On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 11:45 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak <dar...@alk.edu.pl> wrote: > > > On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Nikola Kalchev <nikola.kalc...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Dariusz, thank you for your clarification. I understand that translations >> take time. >> >> Would you please elaborate on the assumption that the most important >> principle of the ED search committee was speed and not, e.g. participation >> of a larger part of the community? What would the bad effects of a 2 months >> longer search on the WMF be? >> > > The assumption is that any organization under an interim leader is > basically frozen. An interim leader is unlikely to make any change. Also, > one of the gripes of the past was a long (way over a year) process of ED > searching. The ED search team wants to avoid repeating this. > > > > >> >> I fear that user groups will be underrepresented again (another notable >> example is the number of representatives at the WMCON with chapters having >> up to four participants and user groups exactly one). There are 59 user >> groups and (as well as I could count) only 10 of them will be able to >> participate at the survey in their own language. Why was the opinion of 49 >> user groups considered less worth that a delay of two months? >> > > I think the main assumption may have been that there will be decreasing > differences - that is, the differences between the views expressed in the > 10 major languages will not be big in general. Of course, we will see > whether there are significant differences within these 10. > > > > On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 5:16 PM, Yaroslav M. Blanter <pute...@mccme.ru> > wrote: > >> Whereas I fully understand and partially share the sentiment, may I >> please repeat the question I asked on this list in relation to a similar >> topic some time ago. Could we estimate a number of active community members >> (whom we would reasonably expect to participate in the survey) who do not >> speak any of the languages to which the survey was translated, to the point >> that their ability to fill in the survey would depend on the others? If >> this is a considerable number, or if it is less significant but >> considerably compromises on the representation, which languages do these >> community members speak? >> >> > Yaroslav's question is a good one - I don't know from the top of my head > how to estimate this easily. However, let me repeat: we are asking general > questions, and the results are not binding. It is not an issue of > representation. I doubt if there will be huge cultural differences to the > extent that the questionnaire would bring different results if 10 more > languages were added, mainly because I think that wiki-world is quite > hermetic and has a culture of its own. > > > cheers, > > dj > > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>