Mailing List Archive

[Wikimedia-l] Benchmark of versions
As a test of our status of the different language versions of Wikipedia,
I have done a small survey of that status of Birds. There exist just
over 10000 species, very well documented and there are people interested
of birds all over the world, so it should be be possible for all
versions to have complete set of articles for all bird species.

I used a small sample of just 6 species and gave article a mark between
1-5, where 1 is substandard, 2 extremely elementary, 3 OK, 4 good, 5
complete

Versions which seems to have all species
*en 4 of 6 botgenerated and stubmarked given mark 2,5 by me. The other
two were created manually and were given mark 4,5 and 5 by me
*nl 4 or 5 of 6 bot, given 2,5 the sixth given 4
*sv 5 of 6 bot, given 2,5 , the sixth given 3
*vietnamese all bot given 2
*bg all bot given 2
*basque all bot given 2
versions with 5 out of 6 species
*es all manully created, given 2-5
*fr all manually created, given 2,5-4
versions with 3-4 out of 6
*fi 3 manually created, given 2-2,5
*pt 4 where of two bot, bot given 2,5, the manual given 1,5 and 4
*farsi 3 all bot, given 2
*catalan 3 all bot, given 2
of the rest can be mentioned
*punjabi & croatia who had 1 botgenerated, given 1-1,5
*esperanto botgeneted the only one not direct from source but from otehr
language version
*germany who had only one specie manually created but that given 5 from me
( 1-2 manually created also was found from it, pl, hungary, russia,
serbocroatia, africaans and malay)

It is also worth mentioning that a little over 50% have pictures in
Commons, used by all, but one bird had only a picture locally uploaded
on Malay and Finnish Wikipedia

I also wonder why Japanse and Chinese wre all missing out, are they not
fond of birds or are their interwiki not working?

it gives me a total of 11 verions who have used bots to generate (and
Cebuano and Winary which I did not include). Is not a combination of
botgenerted ones manually checked and complemented a preferred option
besides the one who will be extensively written all manually

Anders









_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Benchmark of Versions [ In reply to ]
Anders,

Sounds like an interesting test, but what were the home ranges of the six bird species? If they are not native to China or Japan but native to Catalonia and the Basque Country then it is a little more understandable that they are in some Wikipedias and not others. I can appreciate that ultimately all bird species might merit an article in every version of Wikipedia, but clearly we have a long way to go in many languages and it would not be unreasonable to start with birds that are likely to be seen by people who speak that language. Atomic elements, planets and parts of the human body might be more culturally neutral topics for a benchmark.

Regards

Jonathan Cardy


> On 2 Feb 2015, at 16:01, wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
>
> Send Wikimedia-l mailing list submissions to
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> wikimedia-l-owner@lists.wikimedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Wikimedia-l digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Benchmark of versions (Anders Wennersten)
> 2. Re: Its not goodbye, but au revoir (Richard Symonds)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2015 16:53:42 +0100
> From: Anders Wennersten <mail@anderswennersten.se>
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Benchmark of versions
> Message-ID: <54CE4C06.8010101@anderswennersten.se>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> As a test of our status of the different language versions of Wikipedia,
> I have done a small survey of that status of Birds. There exist just
> over 10000 species, very well documented and there are people interested
> of birds all over the world, so it should be be possible for all
> versions to have complete set of articles for all bird species.
>
> I used a small sample of just 6 species and gave article a mark between
> 1-5, where 1 is substandard, 2 extremely elementary, 3 OK, 4 good, 5
> complete
>
> Versions which seems to have all species
> *en 4 of 6 botgenerated and stubmarked given mark 2,5 by me. The other
> two were created manually and were given mark 4,5 and 5 by me
> *nl 4 or 5 of 6 bot, given 2,5 the sixth given 4
> *sv 5 of 6 bot, given 2,5 , the sixth given 3
> *vietnamese all bot given 2
> *bg all bot given 2
> *basque all bot given 2
> versions with 5 out of 6 species
> *es all manully created, given 2-5
> *fr all manually created, given 2,5-4
> versions with 3-4 out of 6
> *fi 3 manually created, given 2-2,5
> *pt 4 where of two bot, bot given 2,5, the manual given 1,5 and 4
> *farsi 3 all bot, given 2
> *catalan 3 all bot, given 2
> of the rest can be mentioned
> *punjabi & croatia who had 1 botgenerated, given 1-1,5
> *esperanto botgeneted the only one not direct from source but from otehr
> language version
> *germany who had only one specie manually created but that given 5 from me
> ( 1-2 manually created also was found from it, pl, hungary, russia,
> serbocroatia, africaans and malay)
>
> It is also worth mentioning that a little over 50% have pictures in
> Commons, used by all, but one bird had only a picture locally uploaded
> on Malay and Finnish Wikipedia
>
> I also wonder why Japanse and Chinese wre all missing out, are they not
> fond of birds or are their interwiki not working?
>
> it gives me a total of 11 verions who have used bots to generate (and
> Cebuano and Winary which I did not include). Is not a combination of
> botgenerted ones manually checked and complemented a preferred option
> besides the one who will be extensively written all manually
>
> Anders
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
>

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Benchmark of Versions [ In reply to ]
I took them by random, one in Australian region, where many missed out
like fr and es. 3 from etiopian och netropical region and 1 from
palearchtic region.
Anders


WereSpielChequers skrev den 2015-02-02 14:58:
> Anders,
>
> Sounds like an interesting test, but what were the home ranges of the six bird species? If they are not native to China or Japan but native to Catalonia and the Basque Country then it is a little more understandable that they are in some Wikipedias and not others. I can appreciate that ultimately all bird species might merit an article in every version of Wikipedia, but clearly we have a long way to go in many languages and it would not be unreasonable to start with birds that are likely to be seen by people who speak that language. Atomic elements, planets and parts of the human body might be more culturally neutral topics for a benchmark.
>
> Regards
>
> Jonathan Cardy
>
>
>> On 2 Feb 2015, at 16:01, wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
>>
>> Send Wikimedia-l mailing list submissions to
>> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> wikimedia-l-owner@lists.wikimedia.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Wikimedia-l digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. Benchmark of versions (Anders Wennersten)
>> 2. Re: Its not goodbye, but au revoir (Richard Symonds)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2015 16:53:42 +0100
>> From: Anders Wennersten <mail@anderswennersten.se>
>> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
>> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Benchmark of versions
>> Message-ID: <54CE4C06.8010101@anderswennersten.se>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>>
>> As a test of our status of the different language versions of Wikipedia,
>> I have done a small survey of that status of Birds. There exist just
>> over 10000 species, very well documented and there are people interested
>> of birds all over the world, so it should be be possible for all
>> versions to have complete set of articles for all bird species.
>>
>> I used a small sample of just 6 species and gave article a mark between
>> 1-5, where 1 is substandard, 2 extremely elementary, 3 OK, 4 good, 5
>> complete
>>
>> Versions which seems to have all species
>> *en 4 of 6 botgenerated and stubmarked given mark 2,5 by me. The other
>> two were created manually and were given mark 4,5 and 5 by me
>> *nl 4 or 5 of 6 bot, given 2,5 the sixth given 4
>> *sv 5 of 6 bot, given 2,5 , the sixth given 3
>> *vietnamese all bot given 2
>> *bg all bot given 2
>> *basque all bot given 2
>> versions with 5 out of 6 species
>> *es all manully created, given 2-5
>> *fr all manually created, given 2,5-4
>> versions with 3-4 out of 6
>> *fi 3 manually created, given 2-2,5
>> *pt 4 where of two bot, bot given 2,5, the manual given 1,5 and 4
>> *farsi 3 all bot, given 2
>> *catalan 3 all bot, given 2
>> of the rest can be mentioned
>> *punjabi & croatia who had 1 botgenerated, given 1-1,5
>> *esperanto botgeneted the only one not direct from source but from otehr
>> language version
>> *germany who had only one specie manually created but that given 5 from me
>> ( 1-2 manually created also was found from it, pl, hungary, russia,
>> serbocroatia, africaans and malay)
>>
>> It is also worth mentioning that a little over 50% have pictures in
>> Commons, used by all, but one bird had only a picture locally uploaded
>> on Malay and Finnish Wikipedia
>>
>> I also wonder why Japanse and Chinese wre all missing out, are they not
>> fond of birds or are their interwiki not working?
>>
>> it gives me a total of 11 verions who have used bots to generate (and
>> Cebuano and Winary which I did not include). Is not a combination of
>> botgenerted ones manually checked and complemented a preferred option
>> besides the one who will be extensively written all manually
>>
>> Anders
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>