Talk:Wikimedia Blog/Drafts/4500 new articles created using Content Translation

Comments

• You'll note that I've cut a lot of text. This is because much of the information in the first draft was repeated multiple times! Please feel free to re-add anything unique that I may have accidentally cut out.
• Given the title, can we have more details about the 5000 new articles?
  • Related: if small Wikipedias are the target here, why are we trumpeting the French Wikipedia's 500 new articles?
• As an outcome of these measures, we now see a sharp increase in the number of new articles being created every week by increasing number of new users. How much of an increase?
• Re "Feature improvement highlights": can you relate these to a non-technical audience, or can we just cut them to focus on the more news-worthy 5000 articles?
• Re "Upcoming features": these are too vague. Can you be more specific, or can we just cut them for the same reason? Ed Erhart (WMF) (talk) 19:12, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Reply to comments

Hi Ed, thanks for the review. Some comments:

• Given the title, can we have more details about the 5000 new articles? -> Are you looking for the kind of articles that were translated? We may have to look this up but can add a few examples soon
• Related: if small Wikipedias are the target here, why are we trumpeting the French Wikipedia's 500 new articles? -> this I think went of context after the truncated review. The emphasis was on the fact that CX has MT, but even without MT some Wikipedias found the other features useful to create a whole lot of articles. Prime example, French which did not have any MT support.
• How much of an increase? -> its covered on the supporting images that we took from our monthly report page (linked towards the end of the post). Do you recommend that we also call out the numbers? My concern is that it changes very frequently . We wanted to just inform about the trend and let people know where they can find the actual numbers (through the reports and stats page).
• *Re "Feature improvement highlights": can you relate these to a non-technical audience, or can we just cut them to focus on the more news-worthy 5000 articles? -> Well, generally ours is a tech blog post but in no way do we want to make it non participatory for our audience. Let me check on this one.
• *Re "Upcoming features": these are too vague. Can you be more specific, or can we just cut them for the same reason? -> same reason as above. Let me check this one too.--Runa Bhattacharjee (WMF) (talk) 07:02, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

• • @Runab WMF: Re 5000 articles, yes, exactly. I'd love to be able to link to two of what you think are the best examples.
  • Re "how much of an interest," could you give a general percentage uptick, perhaps? Or maybe a "as of ___, <number>" ?
  • Re upcoming features, please do. I just don't really see what something like "Redesigned statistics page with additional data." gives to the general reader if there's no specifics. :-) Perhaps I could condense them into prose? Ed Erhart (WMF) (talk) 21:17, 9 June 2015 (UTC)