Gregory, I would love to see current data of that type. I - and probably many others - would be extremely grateful if you were to publish it.
Mark On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 10:07 PM, Gregory Maxwell<gmaxw...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 9:22 PM, Lars Aronsson<l...@aronsson.se> wrote: >> Kaare Olsen wrote: >> >>> What I think is the primary reason for the Danish Wikipedia >>> being much smaller than the "neighbouring" languages is that >>> Danes generally are internationally minded and pride themselves >>> on being good at English - people may simply prefer to use/edit >>> Wikipedia in that language (even I did that when first attracted >>> to Wikipedia). >> >> I find it hard to believe that this would be a major difference >> between Denmark and Sweden. But it would be really interesting if >> we could somehow trace the use of the English Wikipedia to users >> of various mother tongues (for Northern Europe, country or IP >> address range might be a good enough approximation for mother >> tongue). Perhaps Swedish users stay on the Swedish Wikipedia to >> read about sports, but go to the English to read about music. >> >> For each IP address range, we could (well, Domas could) analyze >> which language of Wikipedia those users primarily go to. If users >> from 130.236.xxx.yyy mostly visit the English and Swedish >> Wikipedia, we can assume that it constitutes a Swedish-speaking >> community. If no conclusive pattern is shown on the /16 (class B) >> range, each /24 (class C) net can be analyzed individually. > > I published a very simple GEO vs Project readership report a couple of > years back. I could dig up the data, but it's old now. It's not > terribly hard to run, and the old script should still work. > > > It was generally the case that for much of the world English Wikipedia > was accessed Wikipedia by readers with roughly comparable frequency to > the 'expected' language, and in some cases far more so… though there > were some significant exceptions: For example the Italians stuck to > itwiki and the Japanese stuck to jawiki. Much of Europe was more > mixed. > > > There is also this old data: > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Edits_by_project_and_country_of_origin > > > How many messages need to be translated to make mediawiki basically > usable? My own belief was that you only needed a few dozens to make > the software basically usable, at least enough to bootstrap usage. > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
