Talk:List of Wikipedias by sample of articles/Growth

Explaination[edit]

I don't understand what is this first place and second place are really all about, could be please explain.Thnks--Ramsis II 21:50, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Somepeople (or at least myself) were interested in which wikis improved the most with regards to the score. If you sort the table by growth, the first entry gets "1st place", the second "2nd place", etc. And this table gets calculated every month so that is why there are six "1st places" so far in 2009. Basically the list tells a bit about the history of the improvements. --MarsRover 22:55, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thank you very much for coming up with this new tool which would be so helpful for small wikipedias like ours arz.wikipedia.org.--Ramsis II 17:27, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

December 2012/January 2013 missing?[edit]

Could it be that the data for december 2012, published on 2013-01-05, were lost? Searching for "Jan 2013" on the page does not find anything. – Umbert' (talk) 18:05, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Uncomplete september update[edit]

Hi, I´ve noted that the third place in september 4th is for cantonese (zh-yue) and galician (gl) wikis, both with +0.98 growth, but it is recognised this place for cantonese only. Besides, bulgarian (bg) wiki must have an Honorable Mention. Can anybody correct this? --Xosé Antonio (talk) 19:31, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The growths were not exactly equal, the comparison used more decimal places than displyed:

zh-yue 15.988888888888888888888888888889 - 15.01 = 0.978888888888888888888888888889
gl 37.266666666666666666666666666667 - 36.29 = 0.976666666666666666666666666667

And honorable mentions are given if the growth as least one full point but still doesn't place --MarsRover 23:31, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation! --Xosé Antonio (talk) 20:13, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]