Analysis of the Indic Language Wikipedia Statistical Report 2012

The content of this blogpost is moved to the new domain. Please visit http://shijualex.in/analysis-of-the-indic-language-statistical-report-2012/ to read this blogpost.

About these ads
This entry was posted in Indian Language Wikipedia Statistics, Indian Language Wikipedias, Wikimedia, Wikipedia, WMF and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Analysis of the Indic Language Wikipedia Statistical Report 2012

  1. Vishnu says:

    Hi Shiju, Thanks for this very useful analytical report. The 2kb, 5kb, 10kb parameter does bring in a critical perspective on the quality of the content on Indian Language wikipedias. Thanks to Jyothis for the effort. You mentioned about the problem of stubs by bots for Hindi, Telugu and Bishnupriya Manipuri. Is there anyway we can look at the performance of these language wikis say over the last 3 years to get a clear picture? Could not agree more with you about the required impetus that need to be given on community building. But you also say (in the earlier report) and I quote “Even though many outreach programs had happened across country, that is not showing up in terms of number of active editors”. I guess this means that we need to re-look at the way we are doing the Outreach programmes in building the community. I think this is an important learning and needs critical reflection from all the Indian language communities so that we could give larger data chunk for Shiju to analyse, at least by this time next year. Thanks again Shiju!

  2. Shiju Alex says:

    \\You mentioned about the problem of stubs by bots for Hindi, Telugu and Bishnupriya Manipuri. Is there anyway we can look at the performance of these language wikis say over the last 3 years to get a clear picture? \\

    Please see the last 2 years report in this blog itself.
    - 2010 report – http://shijualex.wordpress.com/2011/02/27/indian-language-wikipedias-2010-statistical-report/
    - 2011 report – http://shijualex.wordpress.com/2012/02/16/indic-language-wikipedias-statistical-report-2011/

    \\I guess this means that we need to re-look at the way we are doing the Outreach programmes in building the community. \\

    yes. More focus need to be on online outreach. But physical outreach should also happen when the need for it arises.

  3. uddip talukdar says:

    With experience from the Assamese Wikipedia, I have seen that online outreach activities actually converts to actual editors, which does not happen much through physical outreach activities. The reason may lie with actual reach of internet and computers to the audience, The online viewers definitely have a upper hand to try instantly.

    In Assamese Wikipedia, we have a policy against stubs, and I do admit that a few editors might have left for this. But, at the same time, many have actually understood the problem and instead has focused on writing better articles. Also, most the veteran wikipedians are trying to check qualities of each articles as much as possible. One side-effect of this quality concern has turned up as inhibition in very new editors to write articles. Because, they feel that they have to know all of this to begin an article! Now, I admit this is probably a very awkward situation to deal with. But, with more online programs we would be able to overcome this.

    About, outreach programs, I believe if goals of both online and physical outreach programs are kept separate, we can get better results. For online programs the goal should be to get new editors, while physical outreach programs should be directed towards generating enthusiasm and usability of Wikipedia. Once, people realize the importance of Wikipedia in their own language, then they will start contributing too.

  4. Shiju Alex says:

    Yes Uddip, you said it rightly regarding the importance of online outreach. And the goals of online and offline outreach need to redefined.

    Regarding the policy against stubs in Assamese wikipedia, I suggest to have a balance since otherwise it will affect the community growth. For Assamese, community building is very very important at this point of time. So we cannot lose any probabaly good wikipedian. May be to keep a balance you can make a policy like atleast 5 sentences should be there in the articles that users create. It is not good to stress users beyond that.

  5. Uddip,
    In Tamil Wikipedia, we have a rule of minimum 3 sentences for an article for newcomers. Once a newcomer crosses around 50 articles, we gently remind her to write more. Until the newcomer is ready, it is the responsibility of the community to ensure the quality.

  6. uddip talukdar says:

    We don’t have a minimum sentences criteria. We usually give a very gentle notice and willingness to help by veteran members. Most, new members almost readily understands what is expected. Sometimes, some members does not follow any advice, in those cases admins transfers those articles to their user page, with a reassurance that once the user elaborates the articles to the bare minimum needed, then it would be transferred to main page again. This probably is not the main problem in getting new editors as very few continues like that, but what I noticed is that once all articles seem well-written, the new editor feels intimidated that he/she has to write such big articles to take part. I understand this because, I feel the same when I have to edit an already big article in English Wikipedia. We are planning to formulate a drive towards reducing this fear in new editors.

  7. uddip talukdar says:

    A little addendum, the first notice is usually given once it is seen that the user is continuing with such extreme stubs.

  8. Pingback: Wikimedia Research Newsletter, January 2013 — Wikimedia blog

Comments are closed.