Usage statistics alone, I would agree with you.
But stats can tell so much more than just what you get from usage stats.
For instance:
http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikinews/EN/ChartsWikipediaEN.htm (be
sure to scroll all the way to the right).
___
Philippe Beaudette
Head of Reader
On 09/20/11 10:11 PM, とある白い猫 wrote:
> Certain projects are bound to loose active contributors. Projects like
> Wikisource, Wikiquote, Wikispecies or even Wiktionary do not have the same
> growth curve as a general purpose encyclopedia. These tools have serious
> competition as well. Statistically l
Certain projects are bound to loose active contributors. Projects like
Wikisource, Wikiquote, Wikispecies or even Wiktionary do not have the same
growth curve as a general purpose encyclopedia. These tools have serious
competition as well. Statistically looking at numbers is unwise unless you
are g
On 09/13/11 6:11 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote:
>
> I am not a Wictionary contributor but I was never able to understand why
> we have Wictionaries in different language, though a big part of those seem
> to be translations on other languages, and they overlap. Would it not be
> advantageous to hav
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Fred Bauder wrote:
>> Wiktionary is useful; perhaps you're referring to my comments, which were
>> not about Wiktionary at all. Wikiquote definitely does not belong as a
>> sister project. Maybe it is a "shining beacon" in the cesspool of
>> internet
>> quote site
> Wiktionary is useful; perhaps you're referring to my comments, which were
> not about Wiktionary at all. Wikiquote definitely does not belong as a
> sister project. Maybe it is a "shining beacon" in the cesspool of
> internet
> quote sites; well, there are lots of things the rest of the Internet
Wiktionary is useful; perhaps you're referring to my comments, which were
not about Wiktionary at all. Wikiquote definitely does not belong as a
sister project. Maybe it is a "shining beacon" in the cesspool of internet
quote sites; well, there are lots of things the rest of the Internet does
poorl
> In the discussion of the Wikinews fork (may they thrive), I picked up
> some comments predicting the death of Wiktionary and Wikiquote,
> referring to the low numbers of regular contributors.
>
> I don't think that means the projects are dying: I'm an infrequent
> contributor to both of those pro
On 13 September 2011 16:04, John Vandenberg wrote:
> Supporting/Investing in the extensions used by OmegaWiki.
> http://www.omegawiki.org/Special:Version
Including one credited, I see, to "Alan Smithee" ...
- d.
___
foundation-l mailing list
founda
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 11:46 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> 2011/9/13 David Richfield :
>
>>> It's possible. The interface part is even quite easy.
>>> The hard part is defining a data model to contain all the words in all
>>> languages, with definitions in all languages, with morphology tables,
>>> e
I prefer WMF caring about the currently hosted sister projects, instead of
adding more.
2011/9/13 David Gerard
> 2011/9/13 David Richfield :
>
> >> It's possible. The interface part is even quite easy.
> >> The hard part is defining a data model to contain all the words in all
> >> languages, wi
2011/9/13 David Richfield :
>> It's possible. The interface part is even quite easy.
>> The hard part is defining a data model to contain all the words in all
>> languages, with definitions in all languages, with morphology tables,
>> etc. Something like this is slowly being done at www.omegawiki.
> It's possible. The interface part is even quite easy.
>
> The hard part is defining a data model to contain all the words in all
> languages, with definitions in all languages, with morphology tables,
> etc. Something like this is slowly being done at www.omegawiki.org and
> there are other proje
2011/9/13 David Richfield :
>> I am not a Wictionary contributor but I was never able to understand why
>> we have Wictionaries in different language, though a big part of those seem
>> to be translations on other languages, and they overlap. Would it not be
>> advantageous to have just one Wiction
> I am not a Wictionary contributor but I was never able to understand why
> we have Wictionaries in different language, though a big part of those seem
> to be translations on other languages, and they overlap. Would it not be
> advantageous to have just one Wictionary (as we have just one Commons
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 14:55:37 +0200, David Richfield
wrote:
> In the discussion of the Wikinews fork (may they thrive), I picked up
> some comments predicting the death of Wiktionary and Wikiquote,
> referring to the low numbers of regular contributors.
>
> I don't think that means the projects ar
2011/9/13 David Richfield :
> I don't think that means the projects are dying: I'm an infrequent
> contributor to both of those projects, and every time I go there,
> they're better.
Absolutely true. In the last year or so i've been using English,
Dutch, French, Spanish, Polish, Czech, Lithunian a
2011/9/13 David Richfield :
> As for Wikiquote being one of our less useful projects, that's
> possibly true, but only because the other projects are so awesome!
> The web is awash with crap quotation websites of with the same
> misattributed quotes being incestuously copied around - Wikiquote is
In the discussion of the Wikinews fork (may they thrive), I picked up
some comments predicting the death of Wiktionary and Wikiquote,
referring to the low numbers of regular contributors.
I don't think that means the projects are dying: I'm an infrequent
contributor to both of those projects, and
19 matches
Mail list logo
