Although page depth was not really connected with the current
trend,  Personally, I think page depth is *no longer a reliable* metric for
comparison, here is why I think so.

Assamese Wikipedia ( 312 articles) : page depth is 339 .
Sindi ( 355 articles): 381

Compare this with
Bengali ( 22,062 articles) : 374
Malayalam ( 16,414 articles) : 320

It is self-explanatory...

Technically 1 million edits is a cute milestone ( congrats to ml wiki) to
take notice, but we cannot consider it as real metric for comparison among
Wikipedias. There are language Wikipedias where Google translation/Machine
translations or bot created articles are banned or controlled tightly. There
are Wikipedias, where they have a free run. Please note that I am not saying
taht they are either good or bad. There are Wikipedias where constant
updation of articles happening, due a vibrant Wikicommunity. There are
Wikipedians who like to work on the articles offline and then bring it live
with a single edit.

Having said that, it is advisable to do what each community feels best for
their language Wikipedia. Of course, it is good to have an healthy
competition :)

But everybody, please do continue to report such interesting milestones and
statistics. We all love that...

-Tinu Cherian

On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Shiju Alex <shijualexonl...@gmail.com>wrote:

> We have users in Tamil Wikipedia who bulk upload 100s of complete articles
>> they wrote offline with just one edit per article.
>>
>
> That happens in all the wikipedias which has an active community. That
> might also be possible with the the Google translation project.
>
> In general, quality of a wiki article improves as more people work on it.
> More edits from more number of users means more quality on the wiki article.
> Otherwise there is no difference between a knol/blogpost and a wiki article.
> :)
>
>
>
>> *"Depths above 300 for 
>> Wikipedias<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias#Notes>below 100 
>> 000 articles have been automatically dismissed as irrelevant."
>> *
>>
>
> Who has mentioned about the depth in the below mail?
>
>
> When we focus on number of articles, some end up creating useless stubs.
>> The same should not happen when we focus on edit counts.
>
>
> Yes. All wikis has stubs and almost of the articles are created as stub
> articles.
>
> Shiju
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Ravishankar <ravidre...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Its not just about stubs.
>>
>> We have users in Tamil Wikipedia who bulk upload 100s of complete articles
>> they wrote offline with just one edit per article. One great article can be
>> uploaded in one click and one mediocre article can have 100s of edits.
>>
>> According to
>>
>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias
>>
>> *"Depths above 300 for 
>> Wikipedias<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias#Notes>below 100 
>> 000 articles have been automatically dismissed as irrelevant."
>> *
>> When we focus on number of articles, some end up creating useless stubs.
>> The same should not happen when we focus on edit counts.
>>
>> Ravi
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 10:18 AM, CherianTinu Abraham <
>> tinucher...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> What probably Arjuna meant was that, some of Wikipedias are more
>>> welcoming to the creation of stub articles. I am not saying that Malayalam
>>> Wikipedia doesn't though...
>>>
>>> -Tinu Cherian
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
>> Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
> Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l

Reply via email to