Hoi,
The Cebuano Wikipedia articles were created based on information available
in databases. So creating static articles is a known quantity. In
Reasonator there is functionality that creates text for humans. This has
been available for years as well  and when data changes, the text changes.

Consequently both static and dynamic texts based on data has been with us
for years. It is only in the opposition by some that we have not served the
data that is available to us as information for those who seek knowledge.
Technically there is nothing that stops us.
Thanks,
      GerardM

On 26 February 2018 at 12:50, James Salsman <jsals...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > wonder if creating dynamic articles from Wikidata is better
> > than creating static articles
>
> Not for years to decades.
>
> https://twitter.com/AustenAllred/status/967842020151603200
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 3:02 AM, John Erling Blad <jeb...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I wonder if creating dynamic articles from Wikidata is better than
> creating
> > static articles. Because we lack tools for this, it is easier to do this
> > offline, and as a consequence we get the static bot-articles.
> >
> > Den søn. 25. feb. 2018, 16.26 skrev Gabriel Thullen <gabr...@thullen.com
> >:
> >
> >> I should have joined in this discussion a little earlier. I work a lot
> with
> >> the French Wikipedia, and we do not just translate articles from
> English (6
> >> million articles) to French (only 2 million articles). The French
> community
> >> is large and active, and provide a unique local perspective on the
> >> different articles that are written. And when I say local, I mean that
> >> things are seen differently in France than in the French speaking part
> of
> >> Switzerland or Belgium.
> >>
> >> I think that we are ignoring something very important here: putting it
> >> simply, Wikipedia contributors do two things. They add information to
> the
> >> encyclopedia by improving articles or writing new ones, and they curate
> or
> >> check the existing articles. All this talk about machine translation
> does
> >> not address the second aspect of what the volunteer contributors do.
> >> This means that we could have hundreds of thousands of articles in a
> >> language with  very few active contributors. Will that small community
> be
> >> able to oversee so many articles ?
> >>
> >> For example, have a look at the list of Wikipedias ordered by number of
> >> articles:
> >> 1. English - 5,578,081 articles - 138,479 active users - 1,230 admins
> >> 2. Cebuano - 5,383,108 articles - 162 active users - 5 admins
> >> 3. Swedish - 3,784,331 articles - 2,929 active users - 65 admins
> >> 4. German - 2,157,495 articles - 20, 085 active users - 194 admins
> >>
> >> When I have some time, I will look into different ratios like number or
> >> articles/active users or number of articles/number of native language
> >> speakers... Now I am not saying that our Swedish friends have abused
> >> machine translation of articles, but I definetly that something is not
> >> quite right about the Cebuano wiki...
> >> Gabe
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 4:06 PM, Anders Wennersten <
> >> m...@anderswennersten.se
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> > I am very happy to follow this thread as I believe it is addressing a
> >> very
> >> > relevant issue.
> >> >
> >> > In my mind we can divide up the different language version into 5
> >> > categories:
> >> >
> >> > 1.Enwp,
> >> >
> >> > 2.the next 6-7 (de,fr, es,jp,pt,ru..)
> >> >
> >> > 3.the next 20 or so, where the basic workprocesses are applied
> >> >
> >> > 4.the next 40-50 which are struggling to generate more input then
> what is
> >> > vandalised
> >> >
> >> > 5.the rest which in reality is no viable online encyclopedias
> >> >
> >> > And for me no 1 priority is to accept that there are these categories,
> >> and
> >> > that what is applicable for cat 1 and 2 is not so for 4 and 5.
> >> >
> >> > I believe the grant model could easily make room for subsiding good
> >> > initiatives addressing the problem for cat 4 and 5 (and perhaps 3).
> >> >
> >> > And I think it is very presumptuous to start talking of what
> technique to
> >> > use and things like translation. If we open up for creative
> brainstorming
> >> > (among the ones having the need) I think very many other ways can turn
> >> up.
> >> > Myself I am deeply impressed what you can create using Wikidata as a
> base
> >> > source of info, and being from a version of type 3 I see how much my
> >> > homeversion improve content with wikidata created infoboxes
> >> >
> >> > Anders
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Den 2018-02-24 kl. 13:51, skrev John Erling Blad:
> >> >
> >> >> This discussion is going to be fun! =D
> >> >>
> >> >> A little more than seventy Wikipedia-projects has more than 65k
> >> articles,
> >> >> the remaining two hundred or so are pretty small.
> >> >>
> >> >> What if a base set of articles were opened for paid translators?
> There
> >> are
> >> >> several lists of such base sets. We have both the thousand articles
> from
> >> >> "List of articles every Wikipedia should have"[1] and and the ten
> >> thousand
> >> >> articles from the expanded list[2].
> >> >>
> >> >> Lets say verified good translators was paid about $0.01 per word
> (about
> >> $1
> >> >> for a 1k-article) for translating one of those articles into another
> >> >> language, with perhaps a higher pay for contributors in high-cost
> >> >> countries. The pay would also have to be higher for languages that
> lacks
> >> >> good translation tools.
> >> >>
> >> >> I believe this would be an _enabling_ activity for the communities,
> as
> >> >> without a base set of articles it won't be possible to build a
> community
> >> >> at
> >> >> all. By not paying for new articles, and only translating
> >> well-referenced
> >> >> articles, some of the disputes in the communities could be avoided.
> >> >> Perhaps
> >> >> we should also identify good source articles, that would be a help.
> >> >> Translated articles should be above some minimum size, but they does
> not
> >> >> have to be full translations of the source article.
> >> >>
> >> >> A real problem is that our existing lists of good articles other
> >> projects
> >> >> should have is pretty much biased towards Western World, so they
> need a
> >> >> lot
> >> >> of adjustments. Perhaps such a project would identify our inherit
> bias?
> >> >>
> >> >> [1]
> >> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_articles_every_Wikip
> >> >> edia_should_have
> >> >> [2]
> >> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_articles_every_Wikip
> >> >> edia_should_have/Expanded
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> >> >> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> >> >> i/Wikimedia-l
> >> >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >> >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> >> > i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> ,
> >> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to