Wiki stats other than the article count
This page is kept for historical interest. Any policies mentioned may be obsolete. If you want to revive the topic, you can use the talk page or start a discussion on the community forum. |
Maintaining additional statistics is a distinct issue from article count, though often serves the same purpose (inter-language comparison, comparison with commercial encyclopaedia, marking milestones).
Voting doesn't really make sense on these, as they are not mutually exclusive: every single one can be produced and provided if anyone is interested. --Brion VIBBER 02:31 14 Mar 2003 (UTC)
- I agree. Consider the votes more an expression of interest in any of those options being implemented, not a vote to actually implement them. --Eloquence 21:38 14 Mar 2003 (UTC)
No additional statistics: No additional stats need to be provided.
Votes for this option:
- 1 (very good):
- 2: Eloquence
- 3: Ducker
- 4:
- 5: Eclecticology Snoyes Andre Engels Urosp pit
- 6 (very bad): Aldie Tomos Kurt Jansson Schewek, Maveric149
Total size: Total size of all articles (uncompressed) shown
Pro:
- Another measure of achievement
- May motivate some to write longer than create new stubbish article
- Might be a more fair comparison between Wikipedias with differing stub/dictionary policies
Contra:
- May motivate large datadumps rather than real article writing
Votes for this option:
- 1 (very good): Aldie Andre Engels, Maveric149
- 2: Schewek Urosp
- 3: Eclecticology ffx Ducker
- 4: Eloquence The Anome Tomos pit
- 5: Snoyes
- 6 (very bad):
Total pages in A4 paper: Total number of pages in terms of A4 paper is counted
Pro:
- Easier to compare with paper-based encyclopaedias
- Another measure of achievement
- May motivate some to write longer than create new stubbish article
Contra:
- May need language specific coefficients to convert byte size into A4 papers
- Font size and other typographical setting affects much
- A4 paper is not well known in North America
- Depends on font size / font type / page formatting / ...
Votes for this option:
- 1 (very good):
- 2:
- 3: Aldie Andre Engels
- 4: Tomos, Maveric149 pit
- 5: Snoyes Urosp
- 6 (very bad): Eloquence Eclecticology Ducker The Anome Aoineko Schewek
Total number and frequency table of words: The number of words of each article is counted. Offer total number of words and a graphical histogram.
Pro:
- more common measure for text than number of bytes
- you can also show the growth of single articles
Contra:
- Number of words depends on the language
Votes for this option:
Frequency Table ([1]) by 50 bytes: Number of article of different size-ranges (1-50, 51-100, ...951-1000, 1000-1050, ... 29950-30000, 30000+) is calculated once a week.
Yes, but rather than a table, this should be plotted as a graph! That avoids the problem of having a huge table to get up to the 30,000 size, and it allows us to present the information visually - a picture is worth a thousand words...
Pro:
- Give more in-depth understanding of each language-part of Wikipedia
- Especially useful for monitoring behaviour of small articles.
Contra:
- Not sensitive to hour-to-hour activities
- Retort: Nobody needs these statistics so frequently
- Not useful over entire range; articles up to 30,000 bytes would be in 600 ranges.
Votes for this option:
- 1 (very good): MyRedDice (as a graph)
- 2: Ducker
- 3: Eloquence Eclecticology ffx
- 4: Snoyes Andre Engels
- 5: The Anome Tomos pit
- 6 (very bad): Aldie Schewek Urosp, Maveric149
Frequency Table by 250/1000bytes: Number of article of different size-ranges (1-250, 251-500, 501-750, 751-1000, 1001-2000, ...9001-10000, 10001+) is calculated once a month.
Pro:
- Give more in-depth understanding of each language-part of Wikipedia
- A comprehensive picture behind the "article count" can be shown
- Capturing various aspects of the growth, it encourages writers to improve existing articles rather than just creating new ones.
- Better than the too-fine (1-50/51-100/...) table.
Contra:
- The general 'size'-related issues (see above).
Votes for this option:
- 1 (very good): Yann Aldie Tomos Kurt Jansson Schewek, Maveric149 pit
- 2: ffx Ducker Urosp
- 3: Eloquence Eclecticology Andre Engels
- 4: Snoyes
- 5: The Anome
- 6 (very bad):
Frequency Table by vigintiles: Shows size of articles N/20, 2N/20, ... 19N/20 where N is total number of articles.
Pro:
- I think this would give a good comparison between languages of the quality of articles in each language as opposed to just the number of articles in each language.
Contra:
- Relatively unknown method
Votes for this option:
- 1 (very good):
- 2: Eclecticology Yann ffx Schewek Urosp
- 3: Eloquence Aldie Tomos pit
- 4: Snoyes Ducker, Maveric149
- 5: The Anome Andre Engels
- 6 (very bad):